The Wii is wasting its own potential

[Splendid]

Right ... and what has this got to do with developers using an existing set of controls on their new FPS?

How else do you distinguish your game from the crowd exactly? Capturing players motions is Wii's selling point.

Jimminy frigging Cricket.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

How else do you distinguish your game from the crowd exactly? Capturing players motions is Wii's selling point. Games are going to strive to capitalise on this. The combination of single and double handed movements (possibly in tandem with button presses) is limited by imagination, not controller design.

Come on kids, this isn't rocket science.

For new games, yes. But I bet that if Excitetruck turns out to be succesful in gameplay and commercially, that pretty much every driving game after will use the same kind of steering controls.

If Mario Galaxy turns out to be succesful, I bet that every next platformer will use pretty much the same controls (flip the remote briefly for jumping for example), with a few added things for game-specific actions.

People will get used to certain silent agreements where the same action/movement/button will mean the same thing in different games. Developers would be dumb not to capitalise on this, as it will only increase the barrier and learning curve for people to play their games.

[Xevious]

I don't think any of us who are really excited about Wii (to take a random sample of forumites: me, JPickford, Massive Invisible Dog, Xevious) are completely confident it's all going to work out brilliantly.

I'm just hoping it does.

But I'm tired of the "oh, it's going to be crap, it doesn't work, I've not tried it" crap that's coming out now, just as I got tired of the "it's going to be amazing and it'll contain a projector and virtual reality headset" crap that people were coming out with before it had been revealed.

[hoot]

Surely a game just being 'good' should be enough to distinguish it from the crowd? No one is going to disregard a game just because it shares the same control setup as an existing title.

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

How else do you distinguish your game from the crowd exactly? Capturing players motions is Wii's selling point.

Jimminy frigging Cricket.

How about some fucking gameplay/story/level design? Is Gran Turismo 4 the same game as Burnout Revenge? After all, they both use [X] for acceleration?

Don't be so daft.

[bcofn]

How else do you distinguish your game from the crowd exactly? Capturing players motions is Wii's selling point. Games are going to strive to capitalise on this. The combination of single and double handed movements (possibly in tandem with button presses) is limited by imagination, not controller design.

Isn't this the point of the controller? Your game is supposed to be distinguished by the content and the control system should be as transparent as possible, not some bolted on even more wacky control system for the sake of it. If anything i'd expect the controls to be standardised on wii games more than other consoles, not less.

[Xevious]

How else do you distinguish your game from the crowd exactly? Capturing players motions is Wii's selling point.

Jimminy frigging Cricket.

So, you're saying that Halo isn't distinguised from, say, Goldeneye: Rogue Agent because they use the same control system?

If they were both Wii games, they wouldn't be distinguished if they both captured the player's motions in the same way?

[Rev]

How else do you distinguish your game from the crowd exactly? Capturing players motions is Wii's selling point.

Jimminy frigging Cricket.

Halo controls became standard on the Xbox because they were good. Red Steel controls will become standard on the Wii if they work as well as Halo's did. Why change?

See also: Idiot.

[Splendid]

Your game is supposed to be distinguished by the content and the control system should be as transparent as possible, not some bolted on even more wacky control system for the sake of it.

Exactly. But those controls will have to be game specific, not genre specific surely. How relevant is Galaxy's remote-flip jump for Rayman, for example?

[Darren]

Surely the Wii is neither wasting nor living up to its own potential, seeing as it isn't even out yet.

It's possible that it will deliver everyone's wildest dreams, and then some. It's possible that it will be a crushing disappointment. It's possible that it will provide some wonderful, magical experiences, but still fall short of some people's hopes or expectations.

We just don't know yet.

So anybody can say "I think it will be brilliant" or "I think it will be disappointing". So what?

The only thing we can say is that it does have a lot of potential.

[Splendid]

How about some fucking gameplay/story/level design? Is Gran Turismo 4 the same game as Burnout Revenge? After all, they both use [X] for acceleration?

Don't be so daft.

So, you're saying that Halo isn't distinguised from, say, Goldeneye: Rogue Agent because they use the same control system?

I don't see how games using traditional control methods hold any sway in this argument. They simply aren't relevant.

[Xevious]

Exactly. But those controls will have to be game specific, not genre specific surely. How relevant is Galaxy's remote-flip jump for Rayman, for example?

You mean different-genre-completely Rayman?

If you mean some hypothetical Rayman platform game in the future, I'd say it was very relevent, if it works well in SMG.

[Splendid]

THEN HOW DO YOU DO A FUCKING RAYMAN HOVER JUMP, YOU STUPID STUPID MAN? WITH A FUCKING BUTTON PRESS?

I give up.

[Xevious]

I don't see how games using traditional control methods hold any sway in this argument. They simply aren't relevant.

What? You seem to think that there won't be "genres" on the Wii.

Say Red Steel's control scheme for the shooting parts works really well, and Developer XYZ is coding a FPS for the system. Are they doing to say "Red Steel's control system works really well, let's use that", or are they going to say "Let's start from scratch, it's not as if the Red Steel team thought about the controls, and we know that loads of people love them, but so what?"?

THEN HOW DO YOU DO A FUCKING RAYMAN HOVER JUMP, YOU STUPID STUPID MAN? WITH A FUCKING BUTTON PRESS?

Or maybe by continually flicking the controller. Or using a different action.

Doesn't mean the standard jump can't be the same.

[hoot]

Why would it be such a bad thing for Wii games to have a standard control setup for different genres? It wouldn't be a bad reflection on the developer / hardware if it does come to fruition. Of course they'll be variations, in the same way there is now with regular control pads. I can see a lot of 'quirky' games coming up with novel uses of the Wii hardware but for conventional genres, I don't see them varying much.

[Splendid]

What I'm saying is that great games have subtlety. Great Wii games will have those subtleties reflected in their control schemes. Ergo, specific controls for specific games. It's not as if developers are going to re-invent how the pointer works, so when you aim at an enemy, you turn 180. What I'm saying is that specific functions will be different from game to game. Using standard controls across the board would be devestating for Wii and Wii games. The vast majority of these games are going to be sold on how it feels to play.

[labarte]

It's only a new controller, by itself it can't ensure success. I can't think of a time when the controller I've been using seemed more important than the actual software I've been reacting too.

I thought the wiimote worked great with the tennis and warioware when i tried it, but adapting it to other types of games will be tough to do well.

[Splendid]

Or maybe by continually flicking the controller.

You've just given 1 million people RSI.

Or maybe by continually flicking the controller. Or using a different action.

By jove, I think he's got it.

And how could you connect a standard jump to the further action of hoverring? I mean, they have to be connected, otherwise it's confusing and just not transparent.

[Lerschumbo]

I believe it would be confusing beyond mild frustration if, say car game A had a different handling model to car game B. fucking up games (as in bad player performance) because of the feel of control of one game is more intuitive than the other is one of the potential problems that would be solved with standardisation.

This does not, however mean there wouldn't be subtleties or sutle variations in control.

And there could be, say, different control schemes in the Options screen. Probably will be.

by the end of Wii's lifecycle, expect to see all sorts of movement with your upper limbs.

[Xevious]

And how could you connect a standard jump to the further action of hoverring? I mean, they have to be connected, otherwise it's confusing and just not transparent.

By flicking up and holding a button? Or is that too difficult for you to understand?

[Splendid]

By flicking up and holding a button? Or is that too difficult for you to understand?

All the possibilities that the Wiimote and nunchuk offer and this is the best you can come up with? Sweet jesus...

[Lerschumbo]

All the possibilities that the Wiimote and nunchuk offer and this is the best you can come up with? Sweet jesus...

To my dumb generic brain that sounds like sensible design over overcomplication.

Experimental games will happen too, don't you worry.

[Splendid]

To my dumb generic brain that sounds like sensible design over overcomplication.

What about this:

A Galaxy flick to jump, followed by small circular motions, aping Rayman's rotor ears. Is that too complicated?

[Switchblade Honey]

The lesson of the previous generations is that, even within the same genre of game, controls will gradually achieve consensus without becoming totally standardised. Does every FPS or "third-person action" game do things the same? As far as the sticks are concerned, yes, but not as far as small details which can be crucially important.

Even today, not all third-person games let you snap the camera behind you with a button press, which I think Nintendo did as standard right from the beginning. Not all FPS titles have adopted Halo's reticule magnetism.

The situation with the Wii will be the same within established genres. If you're developing an FPS, it's obvious that pointing is going to translate into aiming somehow - but developers will experiment with the details of how you turn, how the nunchuck works, and so on.

Even today, many games offer a variety of optional control schemes rather than a single "right" answer. There's some EA racing title for the Wii which offers half-a-dozen control methods, so it may be that some genres will settle on two or three schemes which are always offered.

The Wii will also be able to invent new and original control schemes, or adapt to genres which haven't really worked on console yet (like RTS and Theme Park type games).

The original article is claiming that a conservative control scheme for one title (not even a launch title) which is in an established genre (3D platforming) is somehow a "waste" of potential. Does Mario Galaxy somehow negate the existence of Elebits (offering a new control scheme in a game that is hard to classify as any existing genre)?

Does Mario Brothers DS "waste" the potential of the DS? No, it just shows that the DS can do both a conventional 2D platform control scheme, and something more free-form like Nintendogs.

It's the same for the Wii. Loose conventions for certain genres (like FPS) will probably evolve after the initial batch of releases. But that won't stop individual FPS developers coming up with new and clever refinements, some of which won't have any equivalent on existing controllers, and some of which will in turn become standardised with future Wii games.

A laboured, common-sense debunking of a shit article there.

Here's my needlessly controversial talking point: the Wii will eventually become the platform of choice for FPS games.

I believe it would be confusing beyond mild frustration if, say car game A had a different handling model to car game B. fucking up games (as in bad player performance) because of the feel of control of one game is more intuitive than the other is one of the potential problems that would be solved with standardisation.

Because all racing games on all consoles today have the same handling model and use the same buttons for all functions, right?

[Lerschumbo]

Errmmm.... No. If Raydude goes on having something like 20 different moves that he can do, it could well be interesting and fun, especially if all of those felt as intuitive as your sample. And if you could do all those moves without having to "learn" them but rather experiment on your own and see all of the moves in a list of sorts (not unlike mario64). But if they are not intuitive or two similar gestures overlap or get mixed , it could end up in major frustration as you do the wrong move in the wrong place.

[Splendid]

The lesson of the previous generations is that, even within the same genre of game, controls will gradually achieve consensus without becoming totally standardised...

*Applauds*

[Lerschumbo]

Because all racing games on all consoles today have the same handling model and use the same buttons for all functions, right?

Indeed.

[Xevious]

*Applauds*

But that implies some degree of standardisation. You've been arguing against any standardisation at all.

[Rubber_Johnny]

Edit: Simply put, how do you standardise the relationship between two objects moving in 3D space? You can't.

Well you can, by fitting them into a quadrant system, in a similar way that Red Steel has eight directions for its swordplay. Sure, each sweep the player does is different in that game, and in every other game, but it is transformed into a more generic output.

Now say that HAMMER game by Nintendo also involves swinging a weapon from a moving protagonist, to a moving enemy (two objects moving in 3-D space), surely a quadrant system is the way to go?

[Rubber_Johnny]

Double post