The Wii Countdown

Listereo: The controls for RE never really bothered me. Sure, it was overly clumsy, but the games were designed in such a manner that you could develop strategies to combat the clumsiness, to compensate. Then we have the Silent Hill games. I've heard people complain about the controls for those games. But, but... what people fail to realize is that unlike Resident Evil, the control mechanics were intentionally heavy because we're playing as ordinary, clumsy, scared people. It's a tool used to leverage authorial control in an interactive experience without being so obvious.

I'm not sure I'm following your 2d control scheme argument for SM64. I agree that without the intuitive and precise controls that it would hurt the game no matter what. But it could have had just the controls and not been interested in exploiting all three dimensions to such an extent as it ended up doing. Would it then have been as awesome? I would think not. The coolest thing to me about SM64 is the fact that you can invent your own ways in many instances to get the stars. If you have the imagination and spatial thinking, you'll find that many of the stars can be retrieved in a way that wasn't intended. To me, that is not bad game design, because most of the time, it requires a novel approach. I don't know if this was intended by Miyamoto, but I believe it is a testament to the underlying philosophy of the game's design.
 
You missed the point, Luda. Those were games that were initially cancelled, but ended up coming back. The PS3 is consistently getting better, which is undeniable. And unlike the Wii, the PS3 ports are being left entirely intact between ports.

As for you, Roach. You're right, but there's a difference between influential and innovative. Mario 64 was influential, but not innovative.

And what's wrong with the tank controls? There's nothing wrong with those. Granted, they're being constantly phased out, but they're not an ineffective style for a single player game, especially in a game which is MEANT to be slow-paced like a Resident Evil or Silent Hill. And yeah...Mario 64 was in no way 2d. I dunno wtf you're talking about, Listereo.
 
The controls of Super Mario 64 were 2D. You point in a direction that makes sense on the 2D plane of the screen, and Mario moved in that direction. The environments were 3D. This is important because it makes rapid changes and small corrections to movement far, far easier than Resident Evil style controls. Those controls worked well in Resident Evil because they were cumbersome and added to the stress induced by wandering through a zombie infested world. Super Mario 64 didn't say "right on the joystick means Mario's right." It was the player's right. Anyone who's played Silent Hill and the first two Grand Theft Auto games know that the controls take a lot of practice to control properly, and in a moment of panic its not difficult to misinput the controls you intend, while Super Mario 64 could be understood and mastered in minutes.

Tank controls are good for tanks, not acrobatic plumbers who don't want to frustrate you. The game would not have been as great with tank controls.

I'm excited for launch because I want to get it over with. I can certainly see several less than stellar applications of the Wiimote in the first generation, but the second generation is absolutely glowing with potential joys.
 
Yeah...you're wrong there Listereo...on all counts. The environments were 3d and you moved...in three dimensions. That isn't even debatable. Resident Evil didn't need precise, fast controls. It was a slow game and you didn't need to jump and there weren't any holes for you to fall to your death in. But why are you even bringing this up?
 
Of course, the control scheme and the camera go together almost like matter and energy. They in part define each other, depending on the objective of either. RE and SH needed the types of controls they have because of what the designers wanted to do with the camera system. The designers were interested in more than just functionality. They wanted to create unique experiences with their cameras. RE goes for the static angles to create a certain kind of tension, and SH's dynamic camera's create a special kind of dread (and more perhaps).

I think I know what you mean by 2d controls now, Listereo. 2d controls for 3rd person games are like 2d controls for over the top 2d games, or any non-sidescrolling 2d game that has you controlling some character. But, with 3d games, there has to be a different reference point, and that point is the camera in the 3d space. So, pressing up is moving away from that point, and pressing down is moving toward that point, but you have to adjust your controls if your character passes the plane of the camera.

3d controls place the point of reference on the character. Up is always the character's forward direction, left is the character's left direction, all without regard to where the camera is.

I just tried out SH3's 2d control style and you can see why the 3d controls work better in it and RE games. The camera often changes on the fly to dramatically different angles, so with 2d controls placing the reference on the camera, the direction of the character jumps as well. They try to override that by maintaining the current direction until you're no longer holding that direction down, but that gets tricky when you have to change directions abruptly when enemies are around and the camera is constantly changing.

Just to summarize: controls and camera systems are intimately connected, and all the 2d prerendered Resident Evil's controls are necessary conclusions (or evils if you prefer).
 
No I did not miss your point. I heard you loud and clear. You some how missed mine. Your talking about the games that are coming out on the PS3, but the main factor is it's not at LAUNCH. they all will be out some time next year.

What I was trying to point out is that, when it comes down to both Wii and PS3 launches there is only one title that will stick/ or is the seller of the system Zelda and Restisance. YOu can not buy a 360 and get either of the games. No matter what we say about each launch you can not say those games will help carry the systems for the holiday. Gears will hold up Xbox, RFM PS3 Zelda Wii.

Now what does that all comes down to is what game the consumer will want to get, what parents will buy, what the Addicts will get, I wont even lie to anyone the holiday even if we had PS3's at my store. I'm selling 360's left and right. Why because all and or most of the games you speak of that are ports can be found on the 360 and two of them are already out.

NOw can everyone think about this you have $1000 and your going to buy a Game system for yourself or some one.But you are not into just one company. What is the most logical buy3

A PS3, controller, and about 3-4 games
360 Controller, and about 6-7 games
360/Wii combo, exrta controllers, 3-4 games
Wii extra controller and a ass-load of games.
 
Because you were confused by my statement about 2D controls. Why would I argue that Super Mario wasn't 3D? I'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to not realize that. It's the control scheme that's 2D. Roach did a good job explaining the difference. You're just not listening. And I make the distinction because certain games use the same control scheme as Bug! and Bubsy, but they aren't platforming adventures. Their games that enjoy enhanced atmosphere from the cumbersome controls.
 
I cancelled my pre-order yesterday. Emma was going to use it to get me the Wii for Christmas, but then we found out you HAVE to buy two games and an extra controller or else they won't give it to you. You can't just buy the console.

So, she's going to leave it to luck and large shipping numbers.
 
No I did not miss your point. I heard you loud and clear. You some how missed mine. Your talking about the games that are coming out on the PS3, but the main factor is it's not at LAUNCH. they all will be out some time next year.
I wasn't talking about the launch. I was pointing out (again) that the PS3 has been upgraded and upgraded and upgraded. All the Wii had going for it was some hype that got immediately killed during the TGS, and then buried at X06. But they ruined it through poor marketing, through bad marketing, and through numerous instances of downgrades-for-gouging.

What I was trying to point out is that, when it comes down to both Wii and PS3 launches there is only one title that will stick/ or is the seller of the system Zelda and Restisance. YOu can not buy a 360 and get either of the games. No matter what we say about each launch you can not say those games will help carry the systems for the holiday. Gears will hold up Xbox, RFM PS3 Zelda Wii.
And you're wrong, because if we were talking about games carrying consoles through the holidays, then we wouldn't be talking about Zelda on the Wii. People aren't going to buy a console for a port. I do not plan on getting a Wii because it has Madden 07, and I do not plan on getting a PS3 for Splinter Cell and because of that, you can't actually expect Twilight Princess to actually carry the Wii through an otherwise ABYSMAL launch lineup. I'm not going to make the case that the PS3 launch lineup is stellar. But they don't have to worry about selling units and exploding out of the gate.

Now what does that all comes down to is what game the consumer will want to get, what parents will buy, what the Addicts will get, I wont even lie to anyone the holiday even if we had PS3's at my store. I'm selling 360's left and right. Why because all and or most of the games you speak of that are ports can be found on the 360 and two of them are already out.
...what? (grammar)

NOw can everyone think about this you have $1000 and your going to buy a Game system for yourself or some one.But you are not into just one company. What is the most logical buy3

A PS3, controller, and about 3-4 games
360 Controller, and about 6-7 games
360/Wii combo, exrta controllers, 3-4 games
Wii extra controller and a ass-load of games.
...what? (relevance?)

Because you were confused by my statement about 2D controls. Why would I argue that Super Mario wasn't 3D? I'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to not realize that. It's the control scheme that's 2D. Roach did a good job explaining the difference. You're just not listening. And I make the distinction because certain games use the same control scheme as Bug! and Bubsy, but they aren't platforming adventures. Their games that enjoy enhanced atmosphere from the cumbersome controls.
Uhh...no. There are no 2d controls in Mario 64. And really...name me one 3d, 3rd person game where you jump that isn't a platformer.
 
A few thoughts on the Wii...

* I'm going to have to rearrange my room a little to allow for freedom of movement.. heh

* Speaking of having to be able to move, I wonder if developers are offering alternative controlling solutions for disabled gamers?

* I don't know when I'll be getting a Wii, actually. Kind of broke right now. And when I do get the funds, who knows if there will be any available outside of eBay.

* The whole motion sensing controls are perfect for me. I'm always simulating physical movements for sports and stuff I play, to kind of feel out the mechanics of the movement(s) and if I can do something a little different to improve. I read that the Wii Tennis game gives you the ability to hit like 150+ different shots depending on the angle of contact, swing speed and type, and wrist action.

* Speaking of Tennis and other sports, it's about time someone creates a first-person sports game. It would be awesome for Wii. They're already thinking ahead in first-person games on the Wii with the swordplay mechanics of Red Steel.
 
Weel I have seen that some games will use the Retro or Wavebird controller for some games not sure which ones, But there will be some.


So Spud what your saying is that Because Zelda is a Port people will not buy it if they are buying a Wii? But Oblivian, Half Life 2, and FEAR is something that people will buy even though they are ports? I'm kinda confused so please explain this to me.

And you speak of the Wii lineup as crap, wwll thats what you think. But tell me what does the PS3 have for it's lineup that makes it so special. I would like to know so when I have to seel something I know what I'm selling and why.
 
Roach, the Wii motes are based on hand movement not running around the room. someone who is disables from the waist down can still play it, but people who cant move there entire body (stephan hawking) well... the cant even use a controller so it wouldn't matter if they could use a wii mote.
 
the_roach said:
A few thoughts on the Wii...
* Speaking of having to be able to move, I wonder if developers are offering alternative controlling solutions for disabled gamers?
The majority of the games have a Cube controller option, and like I said, as games go forward, we aren't going to get too much of the Wiimote..

* I don't know when I'll be getting a Wii, actually. Kind of broke right now. And when I do get the funds, who knows if there will be any available outside of eBay.
The Wii is definitely going to be the best-stocked of the consoles. Really, in the coming months, the Wii is going to be buyable in game stores.

* Speaking of Tennis and other sports, it's about time someone creates a first-person sports game. It would be awesome for Wii. They're already thinking ahead in first-person games on the Wii with the swordplay mechanics of Red Steel.
Sega made FPF (first-person football) in ESPN NFL 2k5. But I wouldn't say that Red Steel does anything THAT noteworthy.

Weel I have seen that some games will use the Retro or Wavebird controller for some games not sure which ones, But there will be some.
Yup. Even in the Gamespot hands-on video of Metal Slug Anthology, there was an option to use the Cube controller.

So Spud what your saying is that Because Zelda is a Port people will not buy it if they are buying a Wii? But Oblivian, Half Life 2, and FEAR is something that people will buy even though they are ports? I'm kinda confused so please explain this to me.
Why do you keep on welling on this crap? I'm not saying that the PS3 is going to keep afloat because of these ports. I'm saying that the PS3's game lineup is being constantly bettered because of the bolstering from ports. And unlike the ports of games on the Wii, the ones on the PS3 are going to be the full, unabriged versions of the games while the Wii ports are going to be graphically weak, and the on-screen action is cut down exponentially. Seriously, you've dragged four different, totally unrelated topics into one nonsensical rambling.

And you speak of the Wii lineup as crap, wwll thats what you think. But tell me what does the PS3 have for it's lineup that makes it so special. I would like to know so when I have to seel something I know what I'm selling and why.
Like I said a couple posts ago:

I'm not going to make the case that the PS3 launch lineup is stellar. But they don't have to worry about selling units and exploding out of the gate.
 
i say that xbox has the best ports, but more importantly the best exclusives, but thats me talking, if you have your oppinion thats fine but i stil think xbox might win it.
 
I'm not gonna go that far and say who will win and who wont win. Each system has something going for it thats different, on a selling point. Each system is almost the same as far has what the hardware can offer. But it mainly comes down to games and price point (to some).

If you wanna talk price point the Wii is by far the best in price (system and games) But for 360 and PS3 it's all in Hardware pice since games are priced the same.


And Spud you kinda cleard that up. SO let me ask you this, Because the ports the PS3 are getting are just the same as what you would get from the 360 or PC, It would be the better system to get when shopping for a new peice of hardware? If i'm looking for these ports your speaking of and one needs a new system the PS3 is a nice way to go. Because If I want them I could save $200 and go buy a available 360 which the games are already out.

Also the PS3 lineup is not crap, and it has games worthy to buy. IS what you said somewhere right? But what if I already have a 360 and have those games. What would you sugesst I get for my PS3 thats worth something. I mean I gonna spend $600 I wanna know what Really hot games are out and worth my money.
 
PrinceLUDA21 said:
If i'm looking for these ports your speaking of and one needs a new system the PS3 is a nice way to go. Because If I want them I could save $200 and go buy a available 360 which the games are already out.
...except for the whole Blu-Ray thing.

Also the PS3 lineup is not crap, and it has games worthy to buy. IS what you said somewhere right? But what if I already have a 360 and have those games. What would you sugesst I get for my PS3 thats worth something. I mean I gonna spend $600 I wanna know what Really hot games are out and worth my money.
It has games worth buying. But as I said, it's not stellar. The Wii has NOTHING (not the capital letters). There are 400,000 people who are going to have a PS3 before it has a long list of great games. And, like I said, Sony hasn't failed miserably the past two generations. They have the time to screw around without wrecking their console.
 
ur right luda, the debate on last gen's systems on who was better could go on for years, this gen's war will only be longer. and spudly TP may also be on the cube but there is the difference. TP on the wii is more polished, and u can NOT call me a liar for reading dozens of articals and magizens. and seen comparisons between the two. and some of the games that look bad are actually fun, Downhill jam seems like a "meh" game but was actually entertaining. i know i played it today, after Luda told me about it on Live i went down to my gamestop and they had a demo, and there was quite a line to play it too.
 
TP on the Wii isn't better-polished. It looks graphically the same, and the gameplay is adapted and that's it.

And...you and Luda know eachother?
 
Roach, the Wii motes are based on hand movement not running around the room. someone who is disables from the waist down can still play it, but people who cant move there entire body (stephan hawking) well... the cant even use a controller so it wouldn't matter if they could use a wii mote.

I know. I seriously don't have a lot of room at the moment to swing my arms as freely as I would want or to get into the game physically.

As for disabled gamers, I wasn't specifically referring to people who have some sort of paralysis. I'm talking more generally, which would include people who have trouble moving their arms or wrists or something like that.

spudz said:
...and like I said, as games go forward, we aren't going to get too much of the Wiimote..

By what backwards logic are you basing that off of? Also, I'm wondering when or if you're gonna say something positive about Nintendo in this thread. It's bound to happen eventually, you know, unless you have some kind of vendetta or you're secretly employed by Sony to talk bad about them. At least we agree on SM64 for the most part. :p