This week it's Nintendo's turn to take centre stage in the on-going cycle of verbal smackdowns. George Harrison, Nintendo of America's Senior Vice President of Marketing and Corporate Communication, has come out with some clear criticisms of the ways in which he sees the competition as failing.
Speaking to Wired, Harrison unsurprisingly further advocates Nintendo's strategy of expanding into new gamer demographics, and is quite outspoken about what he perceives as Microsoft and Sony's reluctance to move on in the developing industry:
If they only focus on the Grand Theft Autos and the Halos and things of that nature, they're focusing on a very tiny part of the market. The overall market is growing so dramatically that they're going to miss out on the opportunities that we're seeing in the expanded audience.
Hit the jump for more from Harrison, including more competitor failings, the growing market, and predictions for the rest of this generation.
Asked what the competition could do to worry Nintendo in their current strong position, Harrison admitted that moves have been made to compete, but was dismissive of any imminent threat.
So far, they haven't spent a lot of time focused on us. Now that we're having some success, they probably will. We can already see some of the things that they've tried. For last year's E3, at the last minute, Sony rushed out their Sixaxis controller as an effort to respond to the Wii remote. We saw Microsoft roll out Viva Piñata as their killer app for the Pokémon set. And neither of those worked really well. Part of it is, I think it's not in their DNA. They're really good at reaching a certain customer, and have a real difficulty understanding how we succeed with the customers that we have.
Pretty damning. He also had some interesting things to say in regards to how he believes the current generation will play out differently from those previous:
Certainly I think that as we get through this entire lifecycle, and already people are starting to guess, "who's going to win the lifecycle," two things are going to happen. First of all, I'm not sure it's going to be a typical lifecycle. In the past, we've always had five to six-year lifecycles which were sort of forced by someone jumping ahead and using a new piece of technology. And we're finding out now that the appeal of faster processors and better graphics is really sort of reaching a diminishing point. There's a price point and there's the quality that's holding the PlayStation 3 back. They're selling so many PlayStation 2s because people are saying, "You know what? The graphics are pretty good, the price is good, and the library is good." So we have a great expectation that this lifecycle's actually going to last more than five years.
We also have a belief that we can be, of this lifecycle, 40-45% of the hardware that's being sold. And that would be a phenomenal increase for us over the GameCube era. But on the other hand, we could get over 50%.
However, despite clear belief in a new industry fuelled heavily by "the expanded audience", Harrison implied that perhaps the hardcore players aren't going to be as forgotten as some fear. It seems that with a new demographic comes a new software marketing approach, and one that doesn't necessarily entail flooding the market with casual games. When asked why this year's most prominent releases remain hardcore games such as Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3 and Super Smash Bros. Brawl, he revealed,
We're going to unveil some additional products for the expanded audience at E3 in July. One thing you have to remember about the expanded audience is, they are not so focused on a category that something is launched, known by everyone, and done with. And so I think we have to change our mentality. As we got into the months of March and were tracking the awareness, awareness of Wii is still at about 60% among people over 25. That means that 40% of the population has still never heard of Wii. It's hard to imagine, but it's true. And as a result, to them, Wii Sports and other things are still brand new. So don't be surprised if you continue to see us send out some messages in the fall about Wii Sports, or the Mii channel, or other kinds of things.
Harrison also briefly touched on plans to step up work on the Virtual Console with original content, albeit vaguely:
That's definitely something we're working on. For us it was more of a question of sequencing and trying to get all of the other things that we felt were important up and running, including wireless play and those types of things. So, it'll be coming, I can't tell you now exactly when that'll be, but it's important to us. We're still rolling out six to ten great Virtual Console games, of our legacy games, every week, but we know that in the future we're going to need to be able to add new content to that.
Make sure to check out the full interview for more.
So, reactions?
Well while the man is obviously in the biased position of having to do his job for his company, some of what he says makes sense. It's no secret that we're now in an era where the traditional sacred cows of horsepower and exclusives can no longer be relied upon for success. In a marketplace which has quickly expanded far beyond the traditional hardcore gamer over the last year, it's increasingly important for companies to bring something new to to the table if we're going to continue enjoying a competitive multi-format industry. With big budget, single format franchises now no longer financially viable, hardware manufacturers will have to forge more individual identities in order to secure their own slice of a much more eclectic audience.
While Harrison's comments are perhaps unfair to Microsoft, who've done a lot of good work in carving out a niche in hardcore online gaming, it does seem Sony is having increasing trouble in continuing to try to make the old approach work. "Me too" gestures such as the Sixaxis and PlayStation Home aren't exciting the market in the way that their rivals' approaches are, and whether casual gaming or something entirely new is the answer, it would help the company a lot if they could make part of the new wider marketplace their own.
As gamers, we've long wanted our pastime of choice to be accepted as a mainstream medium on a par with film or TV, and now that that's the case, there are definitely changes that need to be made in catering to the new players required to make that happen. Far from being the death of gaming, this new more inclusive era has the potential to be the most exciting period in the industry's history.
The potential for gaming richness in having three companies each providing something individual is immense, and while everyone jumping on the casual bandwagon is probably not the right idea, a conscious move into the treatment of gaming as an open medium rather than a pre-concieved set of genres may well be.
But what do you think? Is further expansion and experimentation the key to a healthy, modernized industry? Or were we fine before all this, thank you very much?
Contest:
3:49 PM on 05.29.2007
| 
This is why I now consider myself a somewhat "Hardcore Casual" gamer. I prefer the shit I can pick up and put down easily that doesn't suck my wallet or life dry as I can enjoy it in my own way, not the pre-conceived genre's, titles and arena's that have been around for us gamers for the last five years or so. GTA, Halo and other such games are just around about ten years now - there's been no innovation. I can still play PSOne games and have more fun than on a 360 - depending on the game obviously.
Nothing has changed in the last ten years in terms of Microsoft and Sony's console attempts other than "throw more features at people and make it harder to dev for".
Not to sound like a fanboy, but the Nintendo stance on introducing new players, new games, new ways to play - whatever your opinion of it - it has made a serious dent in this industry which cannot be ignored.
So, you tell me, based off of number of units moved, at this current pace, if doing something new and different pays off well?
they're going to have to succeed at more than Wii Sports for people to not "Summa"-ize the Wii as a stalwart kids console like previous generations. If there's to be a life in this, they'll have to make the content work for the platform. I see the beginnings of that from Nintendo, but most of the 3rd parties are still rather clueless on what to do on the Wii.
One could argue that graphics don't matter, but a more powerful machine doesn't always equate to better graphics. It also equates to more interactive environments, better AI, and a more innovative game experience outside of what can be done with a controller.
The Wii will sell a LOT of hardware, and I don't think anyone will deny that. But will it sell software outside of 1st party games? Later down the road, when the 360 is priced under $200 and developers are able to do things that the Wii can't, where will the spotlight be? My guess it will be where the good games are, and I haven't seen any good Wii games outside of Zelda (which was really a GC game anyways).
I know people said the same thing about the DS, but there is a difference between desirable features in a console and in a handheld. Guess we'll just have to wait and see. ;)
"It also equates to more interactive environments, better AI, and a more innovative game experience outside of what can be done with a controller."
But does the demographic which Nintendo are targeting, really care for PhysX style enhancements where bullets ricochet all over the walls and then finally land in your enemies forehead? I doubt it. I'd quite confidently say that the people who choose a Nintendo system are no less of a gamer than yourselves, except they can actually see what's going on. It's hard to look on a situation such as this, without biased eyes. We all have our preferences but it's important to note that better physics, AI etc don't impress everyone.
Granted, the day I played FEAR, I nerdgasmed a plenty watching the opposing forces rally around, split up and commence an attack on all sides. That'll be because I grew up on first person shooters, Duke3D and Quake most notably.
Just think about all the new ideas that will come from OUTSIDE the box, quite possibly from gamers who are new to the industry.
All of those ideas are now happily planted in young, nu-gen gamers and will come to fruition the day they choose game development and design at Uni/College. Mark my words!
In other news...Metroid, Zelda, Mario Party EIGHT, Mario spinoff 55, Mario sports game 99, Mario Galaxy, and so on ad nauseum.
George Harrison
+
Phil Harrison
=
BEST BROS 4 EVA?!?
ZOMG!!
George Harrison
+
Phil Harrison
=
BEST BROS 4 EVA?!?
ZOMG!!
Development of games? Sorry, but on that old piece of shit hardware that's slower than the first Xbox, you won't be getting very far in the advancement and evolution of gaming itself. That Wiimote doesn't even begin to enter the areas of what the Xbox 360 and the PS3 will carve out both through the sheer coding and graphical/geometry improvements to what games will be able to accomplish.
Good example of this are the latest physics puzzle games, shit like Portal (granted for the PC, but also the consoles - PC being the cutting edge as far as technology goes) and Little Big Planet and god knows how many future games that will employ all kinds of new and different shit that will innovate games - much more so than swinging a fucking remote control around the room, breaking your shit in the process if you're clumsy.
But great, you made money. Guess what? I don't work for you or depends on your stock - I don't care. I'm gonna stand in the corner with the group that seems to have the interest of games and their further evolution from the standard "best" to reaching even higher heights. You can swing that remote to Mario all you want. Enjoy. Pong and Pacman were good for their time. Time's passed. I want shit like Mass Effect and Final Fantasy (note the "sequels" of Final Fantasy are a lie, since it's a new game every time - similar elements maybe, but a new world, new characters, new engine, new). I don't need to roll the fucking dice anymore. The hardware has sufficient power to roll it while I enjoy space faring battles and intergalactic conflict in new ways. A piece of hardware that is only able to roll the dice halfway isn't enough. Not by my standards, anyway. Take the Wii and your money and shove them both up your ass, you lazy, lazy, uninventful (that's a word now) fucker. After all, it's much easier to make a game that's been made yesterday, call it new (WOWZA I POINT MY LIGHTGU - I MEAN WIIMOTE, AND IT SHOOTS!), and make profit, than actually figure out how to come up with new shit.
Now that we're done with the criticisms, I'm sure the Wii is fun and a bundle of joys. Whatever floats your boat.
Wow, just wow... Grade "A" rant there :) I am pleased.
Whats that? oh you would like to eat your own words? no problem let me get some milk so you can pretend is cereal.
Also lets talk about the Wii console dominance 2 years from now, when all consoles have wiimote like controllers and cost pretty much the damn same. I'll bet people would still buy the Wii like pancakes then. Oh open wide here comes a spoonfull of your own words!
Btw What good games are coming for the Wii for a freakin change? specially NEXT freakin year which already looks like a dessolated wasteland? and just for fun if you say "mario" or "pokemon" I'll stab you right in the nuts with this spoon! doesn't that sound fun!?
The newest zelda retread, the newest mario party, the newest Super smash brothers (that won't even use your "innovative" controller), the newest....well you get the point.
Sorry, but nintendo isn't chaning the face of the industry or doing anything revolutionary.
The wii is a one trick pony, summed up perfectly by wiisports, has no legs, and will end up a flash in the pan huge seller that made lots of money like pong, but with no lasting effect.
diaf fanboys.
And of course, my bushido blade Wii . . .
We are, however shiny the sales numbers are, in year 1. Year 1 doesn't show the meat of what a console can do.
I'm not a fanboy. I'd love to afford a PS3 and play the laser into a Disc Read Error stupor, and I'm really itching to get my hands on an Xbox360 and play GTAIV. But I'm very optimistic that this mainstream (casual) success will allow for some innovative and good (hardcore and quirky/niche) innovation later in the lifecycle of the Wii.
Meanwhile, I'm still playing WoW more than any console. Its a different world from 1986 I guess . . .
It boils down to this; Incremental innovation v Radical Innovation.
You may not like how Nintendo have changed the playing field and it's quite alright for you to huddle around your massive specifications, but really, in all honesty as one human being to another - more choice can only be a good thing. Telling people to shove something up their ass because you're not a fan of it, screams of fanboyism and I sincerely hope you get the correct medication for that filthy, short sighted disease.
But does the demographic which Nintendo are targeting, really care for PhysX style enhancements...?
I would think everyone wants that. The real question is whether they prioritize it. These types of enhancements probably won't be considered when purchasing a Wii. But what will be the things that continue to drive software sales? People are going to buy a Wii and play and love it, but will they keep buying games? Will they still rush home every night to play? I know this has been asked before, but I feel like it's a valid question: what happens when the newness of the motion controller wears off? I see three possible scenarios...
1. Developers keep creating innovative games (the likes of which have never been seen), and the focus shifts from the controller to these new types of games, and the Wii continues to flourish years after being purchased.
2. The Wii slowly gets less and less use, and becomes that thing you bust out every now and then. Instead of purchasing a different console, you find other things in your life to pass time. Sure, you may buy a game every now and then, but they are few and far between.
3. The Wii slowly gets less and less use, but he/she is now more open to other forms of gaming, and settles into more substantial cinematic experiences on other consoles.
Dude, I really don't know. But I feel confident that a motion controller alone will not give the Wii an active life for years on end. It all remains to be seen, obviously, but it all boils down to one thing: games. So far, the games on the Wii are shallow, so something is going to have to change. I don't see a deeper gaming experience coming from a motion controller. Once again, I think the Wii will sell a TON of hardware, but what about software?
I agree with you whole heartedly. But you forgot one of the worst offenders of all, Pokemon. Soon Pokemon will have its own elemental table with all the versions they have out that are STILL the same shit almost 10 years after the first release (and it wasn't even all that innovative back then).
All in all the Wii will do well. No question. But I agree with BlackDove in that Nintendo should not count out the innovations more powerful hardware can provide. As was mentioned prior, games like Portal and anything with AI more advanced than on an Xbox just will not be possible on Wii.
These so-called "hardcore casual" gamers will eventually see that while swinging their controller is fun, doing so against dumbass enemies/opponents in static environments just won't stack up to true-to-life tactical combat in fully destructible environments. That is to say, at least in a military or action game.
I guess it doesn't matter how good your opponents are at hitting tin cans with a pellet gun. Nothing can save you if you want to win that big furry stuffed bear from EA's Carnival.
Newsflash from 2020: After years at the top, stubborn Nintendo has been displaced by a new, innovative competitor! And the cycle continues.
Furthermore, I don't believe it's true that Microsoft is missing out on the casual market. XBLA is full of classic and original games that anybody can pick up and play.
That being said, the DS rocks, but it is a completely different animal. Unlike with the Wii, I don't feel like wretching when I look at the selection of available games for it.
It's Lightgun technology applied to a remote control. They already had both, and they just merged them. That's not innovation.
I PLAYED DUCK HUNT ALREADY!.
Just because you're bringing Duck Hunt to an FPS or an RPG doesn't make it new. It just makes it combined. Sure, it may be fun to some - no argument there. But I don't want to have meaningless fun flailing my arms all around. It has no meaning.
What has meaning though, is innovation in coding engines, making higher resolution textures, models, adding complexity, introducing functioning physics, increasing bit rates for video and audio, and having a rig that can run all that, for long durations while I enjoy my entertainment as it does all that new shit I haven't seen before for me.
I played Tennis when I was outside. I don't need a jogging machine in my apartment.
My point is the Wii is going to have a good year (we all knew that) this year. but after that..
Well the Wii has basically No future, not even future plans.
We already know MGS4 and FFXIII is coming next year, we will also have Halo wars, GTA IV, Ninja Gaiden 2 (maybe god of war 3) what is going to be available for the Wii by then?
a. Minigames or
b. cutesy characters
Evidently, Nintendo manages to create new paths for game design. Sony and Microsoft only pose obstacles to it, with their counvoluted hardware architectures. We don't really need two next-gen consoles. Let alone three.
Disclaimer: not a fan boy. Currently owning a PS2, a Dreamcast and a DS Lite.
Unless Nintendo has a huge card under their sleave. I dont think they are going to sustain their position too long. (this is NOT the handheld arena)
Also lets face it (Im no sony fanboy) but the PS3 is a sleeping giant, we havent seen it fully awake and furious but I have the feeling we WILL see it sooner than expected, besides is the "target the casuals" trick so hard to pull?. HOME and Little planet are obviously designed with the casual gamer on mind and XBLA is targetted at casual gamers who dont want to expend much on games (specially retro games) the same games that cost $10 bucks on XBLA cost $20-$50 for the Wii (in case you havent noticed).
Of course the Wii isn't going to be able to do excessively realistic physics and complex AI, and to a lot of people that's a turn off. And from the hardcore perspective those people are coming from, I can absolutely understand why. I love all that stuff too.
But the thing is, we can't judge the Wii a success or failure purely on our own hardcore perspectives. As much as it can be hard to accept, the Wii isn't intended purely for the hardcore who've been playing for years, and neither is the games industry as a whole any more. While there will be games on it for the traditional core gamer, and I can see more of them appearing over the next year or so as developers catch up with its success, a large part of what the Wii's about is being an accessible machine for playing accessible games, to allow the new game-curious masses to enjoy what we've been enjoying for years. Yeah, that might not be what a proportion of us want, but it brings friends and families together in shared fun and frolics, and in its own way, that's as admirable a mission as creating any ultra-realistic and complex game world.
Yeah, the Wii's probably never going to cater for all my gaming needs, but I've got other machines to play as well (and none of those will either). What it does do is let a whole bunch of people have fun together in ways that they couldn't before, and for that, I applaud it.
It might not be impressive to some, but to a multi-generational family laughing their arses off playing Wii Sports or Excite Truck it means a hell of a lot. Gaming isn't just about us, and we can't get arsey about other people having fun with it in different ways.
And by the same note, we don't want to lock ourselves out of having the possibility of having some of that fun just because it's not the same old fun we're used to.
What people don't seem to realize is that good, NEW, and INNOVATIVE games take time to create. The PS2 was laughed at by many when it came out because of its shitty games, and look at what that turned into. You look at the way Assasin's Creed is played, or the new Medal of Honor Airborne game, or the physics engine in the new Star Wars game, the fact that they can run RTS on these consoles now, Mass Effect's new speech system, the upscaling with the PS3, the Sixaxis which eliminates a lot of the Wii's "exclusive" control, Heavenly Sword, the weapon capabilities in Resistance and you tell me that the Wii is more "new and different" than the actual next gen consoles. The only thing that even REMOTELY makes the Wii any different is its controller. You know what? Controllers can be made for other consoles too. In a year or 2 we will have gotten to the full power of the Wii. On the other hand, the 360 and/or the PS3 will still be getting better and better with better utilization of its power years after that. Physics, AI, and yes, even graphics, are more important than just being able to flail my arms around when I play a game. And btw, in case any of you Wii players didn't know, you can actually play golf, , go bowling, or play baseball in real life, and its much more satisfying than playing it on the Wii, and your avatar looks MUCH more realistic.
The Wii only helps to further gaming in one way, and that is bringing in more people, which, oddly, is also a problem because then the market will be riddled with "casual"(for smart readers you may insert shitty for casual) games. A control scheme can be implemented separately from a console, look at Guitar Hero and DDR, THOSE games are new and innovative. Basically, the Wii limits the potential that you have in Physics, horsepower, AI, and graphics so that you can have a control scheme that works well with SOME games, and is a hindrance in many others. It just isn't as "new and revolutionary" as people claim, I am just waiting for the day when the PS3 or the 360 come out with some controller for like $40 that completely eliminates the idea of the Wii being unique in any way, except for price, o yea, and it doesn't use that much power, cant forget that. And as for the new systems just being the same games over and over again, Ill have fun playing Dead Rising(new), Alan Wake(new), Bioshock(maybe new, will need to rent and find out), Gears Of War(new), Assasins Creed(new), Crackdown(new, though arguably similar to GTA), and Mass Effect(new). This, of course, will only be the 360, as I plan on getting a PS3 after a year or 2. And while Im playing all those new games you can play Mario 112, Zelda 36, Super Smash Brothers 3, Mario Party 5000, Metroid 32, Super Paper Mario(essentially the third), minigames that use the wiimote(laugh), and games like Cooking Mama that port from the DS(which is a fine gaming device, and even does the games better than the Wii). Which System was it that just spruces up old stuff again?
Also how can you blame anyone for not noticing the "one up"? I have yet to see any game that looks or plays any better in the Wii than in the Gamecube. And that goes for Mario Galaxy, Metroid 3, RE4 and Zelda.
Those two companies are really good at providing a polished version of the same thing, there is a market for this and I personally have no problem with it. But, Sony's problem is thinking that this school of thought (bigger = better) is the only way forward.
At the end of the day, whether you like them or not, Nintendo fully understand the interactive medium,always have and always will because they are a design company first and foremost, they understand that videogames are not a multimedia industry, it is not a spec driven industry, it is an industry in it's infancy which must be driven by innovation, this fact cannot be glossed over by powerful hardware doing the same thing only better.
So when George Harrison says it is not in Sony's/Microsoft's DNA to reach out in new ways, he is 100% right. Neither Sony or Microsoft are design companies, I have personally worked for Sony and innovation is not part of their set up. I am not against Sony or Microsoft in any way, but people should realize that there is only one company in the games industry that is going to genuinely keep it moving forward - Nintendo.
"My ignorance preceeds me"? Look, if you're going to try and be a dipshit, at least try making sense. My ignorance can't come before me, seeing as I have to be there (wherever it is you want me to be) for it to arrive. I can't be ignorant "first" dumbass. Ignorance replaces intellect, it doesn't stack on top of it.
The Wiimote is a fucking Lightgun. If you don't know how basic geometry works, that's your own problem that you should have taken up with your elementary school math teacher. The only new thing about it, isn't in the Wiimote at all, it's in the receiver that maps the motions you make so that when you swing the shit, it will recognize the predefined motion coded in the game - that way you can have countless tennis play matches swinging the stupid shit left and right while the tech (admittedly this is what NES wasn't able to do, glad we have a level up in the tech here) recognizes what kind of a motion you've made to execute a swing.
Wow. Truly a sight to be beheld. Seriously who gives a flying fuck? If that mesmerizes you, there are bigger problems that you suffer mentally other than thinking a Wiimote is something new.On a flip side, I can understand the "Guitar Hero" guitar - that shit made morons lose their "air guitar" bullshit (thus improving the median sanity of the world), and yes, it is understandable to have a peripheral that simplifies something that is usually complex (such as playing a real guitar) but offers a similar extent of fun in doing the said activity. That's hands down innovation right there. But to swing a fucking racket? Throw a bowling ball? Are you shitting me? Even if we take into account that future games will masterfully use the system to innovate game play that would otherwise be boring through conventional means (if you read that carefully, it means shitty games considered by today's standard will become magical tomorrow), practically, there isn't a lot of places where you can put all that motion, aside from your ass. Red Steel proves that. WOW I CAN SLASH WITH MY SWORD... wait... that motion resembles much the... the... the THE FLAILING OF A RACKET! I knew I've seen that move somewhere. Where oh where.
Here's some more awesome examples as to use the wiimote:
http://www.noob.us/humor/rejected-wiiplay-games/
I'll give you a call when I need a prostate exam, seeing how you'll be an expert after mastering the Wiimote, since apparently that's all it's really good for.
Also, it's "precede". Nice that you have to try and insult me to try and vindicate my point. A shame you don't have one, much like the stupid droned shit that you've read elsewhere about "NINTENDO MAKING THEIR OWN WAY". Nintendo is sure as hell making their own way, a way to the bank by profiting from your stupid ass.
There's nothing wrong with having fun by swinging your arms. Thinking it's something new though, and something you weren't able to do before, for that you have to be crazy.
1. Are new to gaming
2. Don't have the money for a $400+ console
3. Play games in the same mindset that you play with toys
4. Are a parent trying to get your kids something
These demographics are fine to appeal to, but then Wii people(fanboys/PR guys) say that its hardcore too, or take shots at the other consoles saying all they care about is graphics, both of these statements are false. There is a place for the Wii, as Houghton stated, but what gets everyone(myself obviously included) riled up about the Wii is when the fanboys/PR guys say it is what it isn't, or can do what it can't. Assasin's Creed WILL NOT come out on your Wii, because it technologically can't do those graphics or handle the physics of all the small ledges and such that you climb on. To someone who has played many games, has some money to spend, and isn't a nostalgia whore, the Wii doesn't present as much as the other consoles.
*insert rebbuttal*
*insert "your mom" joke, and copy-paste past argument*
*inser counter "your mom" joke, copy paste rebbuttal*
Arguing over consoles is SERIOUS BUSINESS.
*insert STFUAJPG*
I don't see what point you are getting at, the PS3 and Xbox 360 both have systems for promising (poor) developers, eg. MS XNA, PSP Homebrew (not supported, I know), PS3 Homebrew, Home, PS3 use for research class, Xbox Live Arcade, PSN. All of these systems, especially the XNA system, offer far more to budding studios than the Wii can.
A budding developer could create a game on the PSN or XBLA that could easily match/surpass the quality of most wii games out right now. XNA has a small yearly fee of, I don't know the exact number, $250? and that allows people to develop games on the X360.
Sony and MS have been extra kind to upcomming developers, look at GDC, where Nintendo's pressence was barely felt, The shiggy keynote was more like "The History of Shiggy". On the other hand Sony and MS were both touting programs for smaller budget games. I think the Game programming contest even used XNA as the platform, don't quote me on that tho.
Did you play Crackdown, although, as I said it was similar to GTA in general design, the fact that you can jump over tall buildings and run faster than cars COMPLETELY changes the game. I literally don't even get in the cars. Saying that Assasin's Creed isn't innovative(err, doesn't look like it will be) means you haven't seen video of it. Dead Rising is the only game of its type, it is NOT comparable to Resident Evil of other Zombie games, Im not saying its better than RE4(both have their uses), but it is clearly a new game. Gears Of War is obviously different, I don't have to comment on that, it was LITERALLY designed with the idea of not being like Halo and other circle strafers and it obviously accomplished that. Mass Effect lets you interrupt other characters talking, which could lead to it being one of the most cinematic and immersive experiences EVER, it could also just be KOTOR with some new speech options, but it has the potential. Alan Wake seems like it could be an ICO with great graphics and a more developed storyline, and what I mean by this is that it will be a game with little action that sets a great tone and is a great all around experience.
If you really think that Mario Galaxies(which is the ONLY game on my list you can argue will be/is new OR innovative in a good way) is comparable to those games I listed then I really don't think I can change your mind, because you are defending a point despite facts against it, rather than actually using evidence to create a point.
Quite frankly, I just don't like how a control system is defining the system. People can develop games like Guitar Hero, or DDR, release a steering wheel, or add a light gun for the games that need them. I really do wonder if there will be a "Gaming stick" for the 360 and/or PS3 that will come out in 2-3 years, because the console itself doesn't care what information comes in, which is why you can use the classic controller on the Wii, as well at the wiimote.
From these two groups we can clearly see which type of gamer is going to 'get' Nintndo and which one isn't. Group one will tend to believe that gaming starts and ends with visually impressive titles which are primarily developed to showcase the hardware. Group two are more impressed with what is going on beyond the surface detail - the gameplay mechanic.
Fair enough, but what annoys me is that group one is normally ignorant enough to believe that their understanding of a game is the only definition of a game, of what it can be or should be.
There are many artists and designers I know of who have been patiently waiting for something like the Wii to come along, something which puts the emphasis on design, rather than creating hardware showcases that pretend to be interactive designs.
So I guess yea, this is gonna be a tough one, but for me it's always been and always will be about fun.
But the question is, who really gives a fuck?
They're just video games. Video games weren't meant to be something to take up your life. And if they do(take this as you want), that's just sad. Really, really sad.
Anyway, good on you Mr. Houghton. Nice debate here, even if you did post blatant flamebait lol
You can like whatever you like, but at the end of the day as I see it, games are a medium to be exploited in any way designers want. To try to limit the definition is like saying Pixar don't make proper films because real people aren't on-screen in their work.
Look at the variety of uses of film, from broad comedies, to horror, to action movies, to avant garde cinema, to documentaries. It's the spectrum of use of the medium which defines the maturity of its industry. Like the games or not, the fact that the Wii (and DS) allow new angles in regards to game mechanics can only be a positive sign for the overall growth of gaming as a whole.
Having said that, we do seem to be winding down to a civilised discussion now. *prays he hasn't spoken too soon*
Really, whoever is saying the wiimote is a 'lightgun' is really knee-deep in fallacy land. I'm no tech expert, but the wiimote is nuts, you can basically move it all over the place and each motion has a separate feature in each game.
Nintendo's strength is also it's continuity, in making worlds and situations that draw the gamer in and stick to their principles in guaranteeing that they will still be there. Only with the wii those principles (adventuring, weirdness, puzzle-solving and fast thinking) are applied in new ways with the wiimote and the VC.
Games as strong and DEEP as Mario 3 and LttP were in short supply on the Gamecube and Nintendo only really banked in with Smash Brothers last generation. It needs more creative minds to keep the old principles of continuity and in-depth worlds of the Miyamoto type and combine that with the accessability and interaction of the wiimote.