This guy has to be kidding, right? ... RIGHT!?!?!?
polycounter lvl 18
Pretty sure this guy is being very sarcastic but wanted to see what everyone else thought:
http://wii.ign.com/articles/771/771051p1.html
http://wii.ign.com/articles/771/771051p1.html
Replies
Thats my take, anyway.
ok cool. party system... sooo... its the Nintendo Minii-game, not the Wii? I don't get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fail at humor. Fail at pun. Adam has lost talking privileges.
But yeah i agree that the wii isnt powerfull...maybe this might make some teams actually try to make well optimized art instead of going polywaste 1000 shader paradise. If awesome pieces were made for the PS2 and had great visual quality i dont see why it cant be done in the wii.
Im happy with the wii , and calling it only a party system is in my opinion meh.
A vehicle
A building
There awesome next gen creature art
Wow taken out of context and examined up close the graphics on the wii put this to shame ..what the hell is this guy ranting about ???
ok cool. party system... sooo... its the Nintendo Minii-game, not the Wii? I don't get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wii, as in we want to play games together.
Wii as in W-i-i the i's being two people, notice they didn't call it the Wi, that would be a single player experience.
Wii as in the commercials, two people show up and present the Wii and say "we would like to play". Then in a crowded room they show people who are very much NOT your typical gamer how to play.
I don't see the part of the ads where a single person sits in front of their gianmormous plasma TV with a Live headset on, shouting insults while they teabag people who are on the other side of the planet. Or actually changes channels to watch TV while he sits out for the rest of the race/round/whatever. Or the part of the ad where the guy is blown away by all them pixlar things teh magic box is putting on teh screenz!
and i think the guy is quite right. wii is an upgraded cube with a remote. quite weak for something that want~s to be the next gen nintendo box and has to have a shelf life of around half a decade. has there ever been a system that was so underpowered right from the start?
funny tho how bitching about nintendo seems some kind of a sacrilege to some.
I just wouldn't count them in the hardware race and use that as a stick to measure them by, thats not their goal or their target audience. But judging a console on pixel power instead of fun factor is something the industry likes to do so its hard for them to get over it.
Don't take me for a Nintendo fan boy sticking up for his beloved console. I love my PC more than all the consoles put together, then I love the 360, then Wii. I honestly don't think the Wii has the staying power to be in a long haul console and will drop off in a year or two much like the cube.
What I'm getting at is, don't measure Nintendo's success by what Sony and MS are doing, they aren't doing the same thing. One company is running the 100meter dash and the others are running a marathon.
The Wii isn't fun when you're alone.
[/ QUOTE ]
Get out of your smelly soda can filled room and go find friends, loser!
I kid.
[ QUOTE ]
The Wii isn't fun when you're alone.
[/ QUOTE ]
Get out of your smelly soda can filled room and go find friends, loser!
I kid.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nothing better to do with frieds than playing the Wii?, Loser!
I kid, too
[ QUOTE ]
ok cool. party system... sooo... its the Nintendo Minii-game, not the Wii? I don't get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wii, as in we want to play games together.
Wii as in W-i-i the i's being two people, notice they didn't call it the Wi, that would be a single player experience.
Wii as in the commercials, two people show up and present the Wii and say "we would like to play". Then in a crowded room they show people who are very much NOT your typical gamer how to play.
I don't see the part of the ads where a single person sits in front of their gianmormous plasma TV with a Live headset on, shouting insults while they teabag people who are on the other side of the planet. Or actually changes channels to watch TV while he sits out for the rest of the race/round/whatever. Or the part of the ad where the guy is blown away by all them pixlar things teh magic box is putting on teh screenz!
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, erm, yes I get that. But a system solely on playing with people over.. Seems like you close the market down quite a bit. I love playing the system, don't get me wrong!
What makes a game art? Einstein here has painted a shallow point. Art is subjective, his 'presentation' on his opinion kinda misses the mark. Wasn't the whole fucking basis of 'games' a notion of interactivity? Design (and the code behind it.) is art. The sooner he learns that, (he should already know, considering who he's working under) the sooner he can get his head out of his ass and keep his asinine opinion to himself. Art plays a huge, and often equal role to design in games. People love eye candy, and it can also 'heighten' a games' impressionistic qualities. It's just not the only factor.
The Wii will not have loads of graphically excellent games. We know the sad, but understandable truth that the large majority of 3rd party multi-platform titles will both be ugly, and play shitty because when devs have a multi-platform project in the works, chances are they'll simply downgrade the texture sizes and rip the polycount apart. Designers, only having so much time get to whip out a quick, gimmicky as shit control scheme, and probably regret having to do so. But hey, it's part of the job. If more Wii titles were exclusives, this wouldn't be as large of a problem, but devs and publishers need to make ends meet. It's safe to say Nintendo is 95% responsible for carrying their system. Every Nintendo console since the 64 has relied on its 1st party titles to carry its weight, to sell it's games. For better or for worse, this angle severely limits the "broad target audience" they attempt to meet. The hardware is there, but the existing market of core gamers is left alienated for the most part. Really, I don't fucking care about swinging around a TV remote that doesn't offer 1 to 1 motion accuracy, unless it actually offers an experience that just does a hack job of something I've enjoyed infinitely more on another control platform. (Another note, they haven't completely alienated core members. A lot of established gamers enjoy the Wii's capabilities, but there are just as many if not more who don't.)
Bah. Random dude for the lose. Opinions are fun to hear and everything, but using GDC to make one of the worst points I've ever heard is sad.
I guess I had a lot of hopes for the Wii, but I'm just not impressed
The only thing I agree with in his rant is that games should be considered, to at least some degree, a form of art. Nintendo's art form is its interactive design, where a video game console is actually fun for non-gamers to use at a party, and how the controller is used, and even Nintendo's Mario games are a form of art because of its cartoony and simple style!
Yeah, Sony has been shooting itself in the foot so much they no longer have a leg to stand on, the Cell is a bitch to code for, the console is overpriced, the Wii is a great party machine at a much more affordable price, and the PS3's offerings on the HD and internet fronts are a bit lacking since this is Sony's first generation dealing with them. This is all true, but it's also true that the Wii is less powerful than it could have been. Stronger hardware would not have miraculously taken away the games Nintendo is known for and as far as the end user is concerned the fact that Nintendo is making money on the console while going against industry standard means they (the end user) could have had more for the exact same price.
So yes, I don't think Nintendo takes games very seriously. I won't say 'as art' because that's a total red herring, but what Nintendo has done is to spin 'less power' as a selling point. More power <u>can</u> mean more fun too.
whoever says they like the wii because "it finally realizes that graphics don't make a game and its all about the design!" is simply an ignorant idealist. why? because more power DOES equal more DESIGN capabilities and possibilities.
spore for example, want more advanced ai for a more fun game? want more advanced procedurally generated textures? too bad because you decided to not go powerful and "focus on the game design"...
better specs could mean more fun with more capability in the design decisions, would you like to go back and program games for dos? hopefully you would realize the design capabilities, while plentiful, are greatly limited compared to more power systems of today.
power does not mean great graphics and shallow game design, it means more capabilities for everything.
thats why we see only shooters , with monochrome shit and no plot that make me yawn in 5 mins .
[/ QUOTE ]
yes, and the wii has such a good singleplayer lineup doesn't it...
i think its more of a problem with the game industry in general, not the hardware being developed on. every once in a while you'll come accross a unique gem of a game on any system.
too bad because you decided to not go powerful and "focus on the game design"...
[/ QUOTE ]
They don't go "powerful" because:
A) They can't afford it.
Nintendo isn't running a gamer's charity. They exist to make money, and making money is what they're doing. Whether or not it'll work in the long run is another matter.
Nobody has any qualms with "More power equals more opportunity." It's up to the console manufacturer to decide whether or not they want to take the risk and realize that. Seeing as this is the best they've been doing in quite a few years, and despite my disinterest in the system, they're doing the right thing for the most part.
Scott
So the Wii isn't as powerful as the 360 or the PS3... Well neither of the 3 are as powerful as a high-end PC. Yet I can't remember the last PC game that had me running to EB to pick up a copy.
Sure, power and performance will help with making a game better. But by dismissing another platform because it doesn't meet the "next-gen" requirements is a load of shit. How many of you are still playing your PS2? How many of you are at a games company still developing for PS2? How many of you still play MAME roms, or even a classic console (NES, SNES, Atari 2600, Dreamcast, Mega Drive, etc)? Why... Because the games are fun, not because they have normal mapped character/environments, not because they display at 1080i on your HD TV.
I will admit the Wii is pretty weak on games right now and I'm hoping that changes because it's a really fun console. But to just pay it out because it's not as powerful as the PS3 and 360 is full of shit.
[/rant]
-caseyjones
With that said, as soon as you're over the "new tech hump" you should have more tools and options to make things more fun, in theory at least, but having more options just means there are more wrong options to pick from. Which is ONE reason why games at launch blow ass. The 360 is just now starting to get a good catalog of titles worth playing, the PS3 and the Wii are working on it but no where past the 6mo-1yr post launch lag it will take to actually get some good games out the door.
So on the one hand you have those options, and on the other you have a new way of interacting with the system itself. Eventually we won't have to choose, and that's what I'm waiting for
Banking on this, Nintendo decided to go with a different business model; instead of continuing the typical hardware arms-race that Sony and MS are engaged in, they came up with a completely unpretentious system that looks fun to play and appeals to everyone else (i.e. the people who don't masturbate to benchmark bar-graphs on tomshardware).
The guy makes a couple legitimate points about the Wii being underpowered and basically a glorified GC, but to suggest that Nintendo's success is somehow a set-back to the industry is grade-A BULLSHIT. Underpowered hardware is a limiting factor that can be a pain in the ass for developers (especially when developing across multiple platforms), but it doesn't inhibit innovation or good game design one bit... just look at the hand-held market; there are plenty of handheld games that outshine and have better gameplay than a lot of console games, and they're running on pretty primitive hardware by comparison.
Obviously there will be great games on both, since graphics != gameplay yada yada, I just wanted to point out that, despite artistic ignorance, players will notice vast differences between the systems.
I'm interested in seeing how this split will play out. (Before, you could translate games across systems without too much variation, but the Wii is a whole 'nother animal so straight ports will not work.)
(PS KeyserSoze, is your avatar an ameba trippin' on acid? Groovy
ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!
Looks like someone is trying not to get axed.
The average end-user has no f'in clew what a pixelshader or polygon is, and Nintendo realized this when they came up with the Wii. The average videogame user can probably see a noticeable difference in graphical fidelity between the Wii and 360, but they couldn't tell you exactly how they're different. They'd probably say something stupid like, "the 360 looks like it has shinier graphics and the bumps are bumpier," or something along those lines. They just don't scrutinize or notice the visuals and hardware specs nearly as much as us professional/hobbyist artists do.
Banking on this, Nintendo decided to go with a different business model; instead of continuing the typical hardware arms-race that Sony and MS are engaged in, they came up with a completely unpretentious system that looks fun to play and appeals to everyone else (i.e. the people who don't masturbate to benchmark bar-graphs on tomshardware).
The guy makes a couple legitimate points about the Wii being underpowered and basically a glorified GC, but to suggest that Nintendo's success is somehow a set-back to the industry is grade-A BULLSHIT. Underpowered hardware is a limiting factor that can be a pain in the ass for developers (especially when developing across multiple platforms), but it doesn't inhibit innovation or good game design one bit... just look at the hand-held market; there are plenty of handheld games that outshine and have better gameplay than a lot of console games, and they're running on pretty primitive hardware by comparison.
[/ QUOTE ]
what he said
http://www.kotaku.com/search/wii%20spore...shit-242822.php
Looks like someone is trying not to get axed.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's fucking funny. My guess is hes a top engineer on the team, crucial to the project. EA couldn't fire him, so they probably asked for an apology as a compromise. Dunno for sure, but I'll find out. I know several people on the team, hah.
Then there are those who are avid PC gamers, and who find little enjoyment and nostalgia in reinvented nintendo frachinses and their edgy if a little "riske" hardware like the DS and Wii. To people like that, 360 and ps3 make more sense, since these systems are closing the gap between the PC and the home console as a full multimedia online experience.
What i think some people are forgetting is that Nintendo's Wii isnt some kind of desperate attempt to rekindle an dying flame in the midst of a Sony and MS takeover. Nintendo still has a veeeeery firm grip on the handheld market and their first party franchises are practically immortal. So given that, Nintendo's strategy was never to make a console that directly competes with the xbox or ps3, but rather complements the rest of their handheld hardware, their franchises and market position. They key word here is COMPLEMENTS.
The DS vs PSP is the perfect counterpart and it seems to be pretty obvious that the DS came out the winner, and not just in Japan.
At a lower price point the Wii is aimed to be the 2nd console, I think much of the debate has been with the wrong mindset, expecting the Wii to boast titles that can challenge the AAA of the more powerful systems. What the Wii is supposed to provide is a different look, different approach and a fresh take on gaming interface.
The whole arguement that the Wii is just gimmmicky short-term success is absolutely bullshit, i am sorry. The system has been selling out like crazy and there is a wave of firstparty Nintendo franchise titles that many of us will enjoy playing. Unless you're too cool to play those "kiddy" games, then I suppose that's too bad.
Nintendo isnt here for short term gains, I wouldnt be surprised if they plan a next system launch much earlier than Sony or Microsoft.
I am a moderate nintendo fan but mostly a PC gamer. I've experienced the xbox360 and i was very impressed and i too was caught offguard by the Wii, but after experiencing it i realized that the system was for real. At a lower pricepoint there will be a bunch of third party titles from major development powerhouses because A. they will want to try something fresh on the Wii and B. they will want to cash in on the enormous market . It's already happening.
4 player connectivity, Rumble , Analogue Stick, Motion Sensing, Mii these are some of many technologies and concepts that Nintendo pioneered and their work has been appropiriated or ripped off by many others. So really, I would give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt.
If you dont want it, dont buy it. Maybe the rest of us can get our hands on one then
-caseyjones
[rant]How many of you are still playing your PS2? How many of you are at a games company still developing for PS2? How many of you still play MAME roms, or even a classic console (NES, SNES, Atari 2600, Dreamcast, Mega Drive, etc)? Why... Because the games are fun, not because they have normal mapped character/environments, not because they display at 1080i on your HD TV.
I will admit the Wii is pretty weak on games right now and I'm hoping that changes because it's a really fun console. But to just pay it out because it's not as powerful as the PS3 and 360 is full of shit.
[/rant]
-caseyjones
[/ QUOTE ]
Guess what? The PS2 is 100 bucks and the games cost 20 bucks. You can get any of those others for under 30 bucks with 5 dollar games.
I don't have a problem with the Wii's specs. It's boring as fuck to play most games on it though.
I guess the new generation of gamers who grew up on xboxes and and pc's feels disconnected with the world of nintendo and that's shame, because there are a lot of fun experiences to be had there, they have a great group of characters spread among many different franchises.
I guess to illustrate my point better we can look at the gamecube, which was decently powerful system with pretty good loadtimes, nice design and a pretty nice controller. It was very much the alternative to other consoles in terms of hardware and I guess it's really not what Nintendo wanted to do. Aside from their cool controller the system didnt really radically advance in any major direction which didnt allow them to kind of elevate their franchises and introduce new games to the platform, which is what nintendo is famous for.
I mean, if you look at the difference between the NES and the N64, there were some radical changes and additions, where as the gamecube kind of followed more of the same.
SO given that, I dont think that the Wii is the solution to the budget, dying market problem. It's definitely not a last hack at the formula before Nintendo folds forever, and they definitely do give a lot of fuck about games. My bet would be that they really realized that what they did with the gamecube didnt allow them to push the envelope of their own games far enough so the Wii is the next radical step that they wanted to make to kind of raise the experience to the next level.
It surely makes good business sense too, if it becomes the 2nd console in the homes then that's really accomplishes what Nintendo has set out to do. It's less equipped, smaller, lighter and cheaper to produce. I and didnt see anywhere any claims regarding the lifecycle of the Wii being anywhere close to the projected lifecycle of the other consoles.
edit: Tulk - I dont really understand your "consumer whoredom" comment. If we're talking about library of games, then, for instance, i would bet my money that the psp has more games than the DS. Heck, almost every single ps2 game has a direct psp port. But no Wii/cube game is like a DS game, even if they are under the same franchise.
If you're referring to the popular franchise spinoffs like mario golf, tennis, party, soccer etc. I would suggest that you play those games for yourself with a few friends and you will probably notice that they are solid games on their own, with great design, solid quality and tons of content. It's not as if they take their franchise characters and create quick spinoffs to just flood the market. Each game is made with effort and each game is fresh.
I guess to illustrate my point better we can look at the gamecube, which was decently powerful system with pretty good loadtimes, nice design and a pretty nice controller. It was very much the alternative to other consoles in terms of hardware and I guess it's really not what Nintendo wanted to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
The alternative in terms of hardware? How so? A lot of people don't realize it but the GC is actually a more powerful system than the PS2.
[ QUOTE ]
I guess to illustrate my point better we can look at the gamecube, which was decently powerful system with pretty good loadtimes, nice design and a pretty nice controller. It was very much the alternative to other consoles in terms of hardware and I guess it's really not what Nintendo wanted to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
The alternative in terms of hardware? How so? A lot of people don't realize it but the GC is actually a more powerful system than the PS2.
[/ QUOTE ]
how could you not realize that?...
what i meant was that the cube was more or less on even ground with other consoles in terms of gameplay and computing power.
[/ QUOTE ]
oh, got ya. I thought you meant they did something different with the hardware from the PS2 and Xbox