The double- edged Wii – Economic Success and Game Quality

[Rob2600]

1:1 motion sensing is a failure in sword games like Red Steel, Soulcalibur Legends, Dragon Blade, and Twilight Princess, in golf games like Tiger Woods, the list of disappointing games is extremely long.

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess received a 9.5 out of 10 overall. Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 and Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08 both received a 7.3 out of 10 overall. Since when is that disappointing?

Games like Red Steel and Soulcalibur Legends were disappointing because they were bad. Vampire Rain and Pimp My Ride for the Xbox 360 were bad, too. It's not the controller's fault, it's the developer's fault.

Metroid Prime 3 is with standard buttons as good as with the Wii and Nunchuk.

Really? According to IGN's review:

"Metroid Prime 3's new Wii-enhanced control scheme is so good and so responsive that by comparison the original title and its sequel feel clumsy. In fact, using the nunchuk's analog stick to control Samus through environments as you point the Wii remote to target with speed and accuracy obliterates just about every dual-analog control setup currently available. If there is a game that proves the potential of the Wii remote for first-person experiences, this is it, and our hat is off to Retro for stepping up to the challenge when others couldn't or wouldn't. ... Controls better than any console first-person game before it."

According to Gamespot's review:

"the Wii controls are terrific and intuitive, so if you hoped that controlling bounty hunter Samus Aran would be a dream, that wish has been granted ... an intuitive and configurable scheme that sets the standard for first-person shooting controls on the Wii"

the question is if three or four games which are fun for the family justify the price of an outdated console

In what way is the Wii outdated? It reads optical discs, outputs very nice high-resolution graphics, and outputs Dolby surround sound. Is it as advanced as the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3? No, but as Kid Ice pointed out, "graphics plateaued in 1999 with the Dreamcast. ... I haven't seen games with graphics much better than Metroid Prime or Resident Evil 4. ... Without the advent of HD I would actually say there's been NO improvement."

I wouldn't go quite as far as Kid Ice, but I definitely agree with his overall thought. Graphics have been improving since 1999, but not drastically. Compare Metropolis Street Racer on the Dreamcast to Burnout: Paradise on the PlayStation 3. Yes, of course, there's a difference in graphics, but it's not an amazingly huge difference. Compare Dead or Alive 2 on the Dreamcast to Dead or Alive 4 on the Xbox 360. Again, there is of course a difference in graphics, but - again - not an amazingly huge difference.

Even if some "hard core" gamers insist that the graphics in Dead or Alive 4 are a million times better than the graphics in Dead or Alive 2, "casual" or "mainstream" gamers don't notice a difference. I'm serious, they really don't. To my girlfriend, my family, and my friends, the graphics in good Wii games (Super Mario Galaxy, Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles, Link's Crossbow Training, Zack & Wiki, etc.) look just as good as the graphics in Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 games.

There is nothing innovative about the system nor the controls. This is what makes motion sensing a gimmick. A system designed around half baked controls in order to create an image. It worked.

I'm glad Nintendo went with motion control. I like it. Do all Wii games use motion control extensively? No...and they shouldn't. Waving my arms back and forth for an hour to swim to different locations in Endless Ocean would be stupid. Thank goodness the developer didn't implement a control scheme like that. However, flicking my wrist to pull ropes, open bottles, and open doors in Zack & Wiki is cool and fun. When the Wii remote is used in subtle and clever ways like that, I'm more connected to the game than if I were just pressing the "A" or "R" buttons all the time.

That said, I still play old games using standard controllers and they're fun and immersive too, but good Wii games pull me in even a little bit more.

We'll get Wii fit, too, and probably some people actaully believe that playing games leads to weight loss. Frightening and disillusional.

Why is that frightening and disillusional? Wii Fit won't turn people into body builders, but I don't think anyone is expecting it to. It will help them get in shape though. I bet playing Wii Fit regularly (and properly) and eating properly would make a big difference in many people's lives.

IGN - The Wii Fit Workout

Also:

Yahoo! News - Doctors use Wii games for rehab therapy

"WakeMed Health has been using Wii games at its Raleigh, NC, hospital for patients as young as 9 'all the way up to people in their 80s,' said therapist Elizabeth Penny. 'They're getting improved endurance, strength, coordination. I think it's very entertaining for them.'"

[blue lander]

Let me start by saying I've never actually tried playing a wii, so my impressions could be way off the mark. If I want to play simple, fun pick-up-and-play games and I don't care about graphics, I just fire up the 2600.

I think anybody who says "The wii is obsolete technology" has completely missed the bus. That matters to us, "hardcore" gamers for lack of a better term, but does it matter to somebody whose favorite game is Windows Solitaire or Bejeweled or something? Does it even mean anything to them at all?

Do you think a mom and dad playing Wii Sports with their kids are thinking "Gee, this is fun for the whole family, but I'm afraid we're just enjoying it because it's a gimmick rather than for the in-depth gameplay?" Maybe they're okay with enjoying a game because it's fun to jump around and swing the wiimote at the screen and laugh at their friends doing the same thing, even if the technology isn't perfect or they could get more precise control from a traditional pad. They evaluate a game on whether they have fun playing it or not (sort of like we classic gamers claim to). And these are the exact same people who Nintendo has gone after.

Sure, maybe the wii will only end up with a handful of truly excellent games by the end of its lifetime. How many games do you think the average casual gamer actually has time to play?? The wii to them might just be a fun toy to pull out at parties or on rainy days every once in awhile, not something that they devote their lives/money to and spend hours on message boards arguing about.

A lot of complaints I hear from serious gamers the wii sound like a race car driver complaining about a Station Wagon because it can't win the Indy 500. It was designed for a completely different purpose, one that some of us can't even relate to.

[Rob2600]

A lot of complaints I hear from serious gamers the wii sound like a race car driver complaining about a Station Wagon because it can't win the Indy 500. It was designed for a completely different purpose, one that some of us can't even relate to.

Amen to that and everything else you just wrote.

The Wii is bringing home video gaming back to the point it was at when it started in the 1970s and 1980, where family members would take turns playing games or compete against each other. My family's Atari 2600 was connected to the living room TV and we would all take turns playing games like Breakout, Demon Attack, Warlords, Circus Atari, etc. We'd invite relatives and friends over and have tournaments. It was a lot of fun. My family would also play the NES a lot (Super Mario Bros., Arkanoid, Q*bert, etc.). My friends' parents also got into games like Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! and R.C. Pro-Am.

For a while in the 1990s and early 2000s, it seems like that wasn't happening. As Kid Ice wrote, "I think Nintendo's goal was to bring gaming out of the teenager's basement and back into the family living room, and they succeeded."

[heybtbm]

Arguing with Nintendo fan-boys is an exercise in futility. I'm surprised so many people here at DP haven't figured that out yet.

I love to rile up the Nintendo Mafia as much as the next guy, but writing these epic 5000 word replies just bolsters their "faith" and eggs them on even more.

[Kid Ice]

Arguing with Nintendo fan-boys is an exercise in futility. I'm surprised so many people here at DP haven't figured that out yet.

I love to rile up the Nintendo Mafia as much as the next guy, but writing these epic 5000 word replies just bolsters their "faith" and eggs them on even more.

Is the problem the "Nintendo Mafia" or the Fanboy Finger Waving Club?

I don't care much for the Wii, and I thought the Gamecube was the biggest waste of time ever produced by Nintendo (well except for the V-Boy). I just disagree with the whole "Wii sucks because it's Gamecube 1.5" philosophy.

The original post, although I disagree with most of it, was well written and thoughtful and so have been most of the replies.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Hmmm ... I need the most concise response possible ... let me see if I can respond to the original post in 5/7/5 Haiku form.

wii is great console
too much shovelware produced
despite that still fun

there you go kids, Wii Haiku for your reading pleasure.

[diskoboy]

[rant]I think the only reason the Wii is selling is because of the nostalgia factor. The NES generation is now grown up, and buying consoles for their kids now.

Adults want it because of the Nintendo brand name, and because it's rep as a family friendly console - Nintendo has used the same characters for generations now. Everybody who grew up in the late 80's would recognize them in an instant. Not to mention, it's the cheapest console of the three. But the old adage in the industry is "give away the razors to sell the blades" is a bit off, here. The razors are selling, but the blades they're giving us are dull.

Kids want it because all their friends want or have one, or they wanna play Pokemon. When I gave my 7 year old nephew Super Mario Galaxy or Christmas, he looked at me as if I murdered Santa. When he opened up Pokemon and Lego Star Wars his face lit up again. Kids could care less about Mario or franchises they aren't familiar with.[/rant]

[Rob2600]

I think the only reason the Wii is selling is because of the nostalgia factor. The NES generation is now grown up, and buying consoles for their kids now.

Adults want it because of the Nintendo brand name, and because it's rep as a family friendly console - Nintendo has used the same characters for generations now. Everybody who grew up in the late 80's would recognize them in an instant. Not to mention, it's the cheapest console of the three.

If that's really the case, then why didn't the GameCube outsell the Xbox or the PlayStation 2? It was made by Nintendo, so - according to you - it had the nostalgia factor, it had Super Mario games, so - according to you - adults should've felt comfortable buying it for their children, it had Pokemon games, so - according to you - children should've gone crazy for it, and it was the cheapest of the three consoles.

Perhaps the main reason the Wii is selling so well is because, like the iPod and the PlayStation, it has that mysterious "cool" factor.

[CartCollector]

I thought the Gamecube was the biggest waste of time ever produced by Nintendo

A very true quote. How much time have I wasted with my friends playing Super Smash Bros. Melee and Pac-Man Vs.? Far too much. At least it's some of the best gaming out there.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

For what it's worth, Nintendo sure as hell makes it easy for people TO BE critical of their console efforts.

Sure, with their position in the handheld marketplace in the US, it was what they gave ya' or NOTHIN for about 10+ years ...

... but with the other Consoles/Developers/Choices out there, and the successes the others are having with both third party software developers being on-board in a big way with exclusives, consistent above-average third-party releases, success on the online-gaming front, quality original downloadable exclusive software, multimedia options ...

... it's pretty darned easy not only for non-Wii owners but also people who have had one since launch (myself included) to go ... "WHAT the HELL Nintendo!!??" on a pretty regular basis over any number of decisions.

But, out of fairness, I've been doing that since the N64 in response to most of their decision making processes at the retail marketplace.

[Rob2600]

Nintendo sure as hell makes it easy for people TO BE critical of their console efforts.

Microsoft doesn't? The whole red-ring-of-death debacle...

Sony doesn't? $600 price tag...no rumble...ports that run at half the frame rate...releasing upgraded machines every three months...

"Hey, I just bought the PlayStation 3!"

"Cool, which one?"

Which one? Come on. The beauty of a home video game console is that everyone has identical hardware, which usually lasts about five or six years. It's supposed to be cheap and simple. If I wanted to pay $600 for a machine, only to have the company bring out an upgraded version every three months, I'd buy a Dell computer.

Am I too old fashioned?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Microsoft doesn't? The whole red-ring-of-death debacle...

Sony doesn't? $600 price tag...no rumble...ports run at half the frame rate...releasing upgraded versions of its machine every three months...

"Hey, I just bought the PlayStation 3!"

"Cool, which one?"

Which one? Come on. The beauty of a home video game console is that everyone has identical hardware, which usually lasts about five or six years. It's simple. If I wanted to pay $600 for a machine, only to have the company bring out an upgraded version every three months, I'd buy a Dell.

Am I too old fashioned?

Sure Microsoft and Sony also make mistakes...

...every console developer makes mistakes...

Nintendo just seems to have a knack for doing things that cause for huge, massive question marks to pop up over my head on a pretty regular basis ... where MS and Sony get more ... I don't know, squiggly heat lines from frustration ...

... Nintendo's consistent inability to move with standardized hardware trends - most notably frustrating being moving to the CD/DVD format in a timely fashion, and their outwardly xenophobic online "friend coding" (which nearly defeats the purpose of having "online communities" when everybody is relegated to a non-memorizable, non-customizable NUMBER) ... when comparing the way that Nintendo has handled their own approaches to those (amongst other) things to both of their main competitors (who have both been major successes in both fields of taking advantage of disc-based hardware as well as online gameplay) well, it often makes me do just what I said I've done since the N64 era.

Go "WHAT the HELL Nintendo!!??"

But, again, when discussing anything related to Nintendo, one needs to take into account that any amount of success/failure in any area of gaming will be staunchly defended by obsessively faithful Nintendo loyalists.

To those who are in that camp - if Nintendo didn't want to move to discs at the time that they did, it was a good move. If they never did, it would have been a good move. It was a good move that they used a proprietary disc-based media with smaller storage size on the Gamecube, and a good move that the Wii uses DVD media, but doesn't play DVD video or music CD's.

All good, defend-able decisions, and no amount of quantifiable successes from any other company in the global market is evidence against that.

Now ... don't get me wrong ... I love my Wii (not so much the selection of software in the market, but the hardware - it's nice.) and there is little about the Wii that I think is "wrong" that couldn't be solved with a bit of firmware tweaking (Get online ramped up some more, change the way that online ID and "friend making" handled, add online components to the classic emulated software on the Wii Virtual Console, and give the thing some external HDD support, and you've got a system that IS in fact comparable to the 360 and the PS3 ... but, I doubt Nintendo will do any of those things ... because they simply have never and will never listen to their critics, especially when their critics are their biggest fans! *Yes, yes, thank you, late 90's with the Gameboy line ... but still searching for an instance on console hardware.*)

[neuropolitique]

More of the same lendelin. You've been on this track since at least Jan 07 and before foretelling the demise of Nintendo. Maybe you could just try to enjoy games for once?

Myself, I'm not sure where I stand on the Wii yet. Mario Galaxy was fantastic, but it's the only game of the four I have I can say that about. Paper Mario is ok, but I can't seem to get into it. Wii play hasn't been in since the day I got it. Wii Sports is good, but how much of that can I play? I'm hoping things improve now that it has a huge install base, but for now I see myself buying one game this year, Brawl.

And to keep things fair, I have about as many 360 games so far. This generation in general is leaving me feeling Meh.

[neuropolitique]

... because they simply have never and will never listen to their critics, especially when their critics are their biggest fans!)

It was nearly completely through the outcry of the gaming public (transmitted through voices -and the wallets of retailers) that Nintendo was ENCOURAGED to keep the GameBoy line alive, and in turn encourage 3rd party developers to continue to support an aging, technically limited system.

Just curious, which is it?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Just curious, which is it?

Ah, touche mon petit fromage.

Okay. In the case of the Gameboy, they wanted to scrap it, but due to the massive amount of demand from retailers and consumers, they kept the line alive (un-altered hardware-wise for the next few years, but alive nonetheless).

I wish I could think of an instance over the past three console cycles where people have been critical of their decisions and they've gone back and re-thought/re-formatted anything mid-cycle at all based on public outcry, where we've clearly seen that to SOME degree from Sega, MS and Sony.

I mean, look at the great hardware revisions that Nintendo gives us with their handhelds (GBP<GBC<GBA<GBASP<DS<DS Lite) ... why can't they stop, look, listen and adjust with their consoles in the same fashion?

[diskoboy]

If that's really the case, then why didn't the GameCube outsell the Xbox or the PlayStation 2? It was made by Nintendo, so - according to you - it had the nostalgia factor, it had Super Mario games, so - according to you - adults should've felt comfortable buying it for their children, it had Pokemon games, so - according to you - children should've gone crazy for it, and it was the cheapest of the three consoles.

Perhaps the main reason the Wii is selling so well is because, like the iPod and the PlayStation, it has that mysterious "cool" factor.

Because Nintendo stuck with the kiddie motif during the Gamecube era. The Gamecube (and now the DS and Wii) were a dumping ground for Nickelodeon\Disney\Cartoon Network shovelware. As a 33 year old, it's just hard to take the Wii seriously. There was a new Mario Kart or Naruto game every 6 weeks, it seemed. Plus there were no NEW IP's to speak of. Eternal Darkness and Pikmin - maybe. But that's about it.

What I meant was Adults are now looking at the Wii through the rose-tinted glasses of childhood. For a few bucks, you can go and download all those NES/SNES/Genesis games you loved as a kid, and maybe they'll make a new Metroid, Zelda, or Mario to keep the cycle going.

If you ask me, Nintendo is slowly becoming the Disney of the gaming industry.

[djbeatmongrel]

you forgot chibi robo and animal crossing, they were also new IPs

[blissfulnoise]

Excellent original post. In 100% agreement. Well, nearly 100%... Talladega Nights is a damn funny movie.

Where people get off track in lendelin's argument, what I perceive it to be anyway, isn't so much a bashing of the console. But a bashing of the technology. And it's well deserved because, frankly, it's faulty.

The decision to use RF and Accelerometers was an incredibly poor one. And don't tell me it's the cost. Nintendo makes money off of each Wii sold; an exclusive attribute in this generation.

The Sixaxis offers an infinitely superior motion control experience due to the tech applied. And if, as a company, you were putting all of your eggs into this proverbial basket, you'd think they'd have made the effort to focus R&D into your systems main selling point.

I made a big deal in my mini-review of No More Heroes that it was the first game I've played to incorporate the motion control gimmick nearly flawlessly; its unobtrusive, engaging, clever, and, most important, creative. Most so in Japan where the "sword-charge" motion actually has you mimicking something else. But its not the core component of the game play.

Take a look at a game like WarioWare where the core game component does exclusively rely on the motion controls. Several of the mini-games are extremely difficult to complete due to the faulty nature of the controls. Others are nearly broken. WarioWare should have been a showcase for what the Wii was capable of. Instead it had the direct opposite effect and showcased every flaw in the mechanic.

When I play a particularly intensive motion sensitive Wii game (of which, there are not many), I have to ensure that there are no reflective surfaces in the path between the TV (sensor bar) and myself. I also have to dampen any direct light sources. When I play flOw or Warhawk, I focus on having a good time, regardless of surroundings.

So, in response to this, most Wii (not necessarily Nintendo) fans will point to the games popularity and success of a handful of games: Metroid (I totally disagree with IGNs review), Zelda, Wii Sports, et all. I think this is a bit of a red herring and I'll try to filet the fish...

Let's start with sales. Yes, the Wii is moving systems at a nearly unprecedented rate (I say nearly due to their success with the DS) but what about the larger picture? The global attach rate is 3.6 games per console. This takes into account that Wii Sports is not bundled with the system into Japan and that the game has a nearly 1:1 attach rate there. Wii Play is also sitting a nearly 1:1 attach rate both there and here. This doesn't leave room for many 3rd party titles and the trend suggests that people are only interested in 1st party games. The Gamecube suffered a similiar fate, however, the install base wasn't nearly as large. What does this mean? That, should the trend continue, the Wii will see some interesting one-off unique, quirky, or otherwise interesting titles in the 3rd party scene but not much else. Also, Nintendo will make a boat load of cash.

So, sure, Nintendo's strategy of appealing to non-gamers is working, at least superficially. But what we're learning is that non-gamers don't really like to game. And so long as the Wii is a game system (and I'm pretty sure it is), that has to count as a failure in principle (though not in Nintendo's pocketbook).

Regarding the games, and let’s be clear that this is the most important factor, yes, there are some great games for the Wii. Endless Ocean is a breath of fresh air on retail shelves. (Though not as unique as its made out to be. See: Aquanauts Holiday, Everblue.) No More Heroes is essential gaming. Super Mario Galaxy is very entertaining (though I seriously thought that Sunshine was the better game). Super Paper Mario is a fine and fun time (though clearly a Gamecube game). Twilight Princess is much the same way and shows that Zelda is getting a little long in the tooth. And the Virtual Console offers some fantastic gaming even if the return on investment is a bit high.

We all know that the Wii will deliver some very high quality gaming. So much so that gamers would be remiss not to get one to experience it. But that high quality will crux on the motion controls that set the system apart. My guess is that most games will steer clear of it and focus on traditional content. This is what makes the DS so successful over the technically superior PSP. Some of the best games on the system don't use the touch functionality at all, or if they do, only in a superficial way. It's all about content and Nintendo is set to deliver as well as (if not better) than anyone else.

As far as "Next Generation" goes, I'm not much of a graphics guy, some of my favorite games highly style and originality over technical prowess and this is well documented on the forums. But there are some games on the system that look abysmal in context of modern games (Metroid, I'm looking at you); so much so that it detracts from the game-play experience. This reiterates that if the Wii is looking to plant a stake in the ground with gamers, they're going to have to do it through gameplay.

I own 9 Wii Games. Of them, I've played 4 for more than a few hours. But, that said, I own zero physical games for the PS3 so read into that what you will.

For all my gripes about the Wii, I'll say again that I think it's an essential system for gamers. Just like the 360 and just like the PS3. I know not everyone can own all three, especially with the price points (and let's face it, $250 isn't "cheap" or a casual purchase for most of America) and that's probably where a lot of these stupid arguments come in. People who don't have (or can't afford) to own all three consoles feel as though they're backing something and take offense at criticism levied against their metaphorical horse. I understand the sentiment but blind obedience to a brand because of how you voted your dollars is pretty dumb.

All three current consoles have their strengths. It's just the Wii's strength isn't where people expected it to be (controls). Instead, its in the place that all Nintendo consoles strength lay; in the first party games.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

What Blissfulnoise said.

I've always been of the position that one can be both a supporter AND a critic of something. In fact, I think that it's most important for supporters TO be critical of small failings or find areas for improvement in any thing that anybody is passionate about.

That's how the learning process works most effectively. If you're a student of any art, (Nintendo being the student in this scenario) personal breakthroughs come at a certain speed, but if you listen not only to what your teacher says, but also your critics and your peers, you'll move more quickly towards the next level of quality/learnedness towards perfection (though, perfection is almost never realistically attainable anyway).

I've always been a supporter of what Nintendo has done in the marketplace, however, any time I provide a criticism, which in most every case is meant to be a provision of advice, and not a personal attack, I'm usually publicly stoned by the more ... "blindly patriotic" of the Nintendo faithful.

[blissfulnoise]

Eternal Darkness and Pikmin - maybe. But that's about it.

Crystal Chronicles, Cubivore, Killer7, Odama, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, Metroid Prime (so different, it revitalized the franchise), and Baten Kaitos were other new, successful IPs.

Animal Crossing, however, wasn't a new IP. It was Animal Forest 1.5. Though it was new to the US.