Wii, glimmer of the Nintendophile’s eye. Dismissing its unique abilities would be asinine. The “new gen” system has a lot going for it, with strong support from N-fans and jaded media alike to back it up. Graphics might not be much, but the 3rd and 1st party software and pizazzy 3D controller make it more than buzzworthy, to the point where they’re talkin’ Championship this season.
Most have been skeptical about Wii’s chances, obviously and unsurprisingly. This far, Nintendo has given a lot of “look at DS” hints when asked about its strategy for the console fight. Undercut everyone and simplify all. Sounds good on paper so far. But Nintendo needs to do a lot more to succeed with Wii than just following DS’ lead, and i think there already are problems. Here are three things that might hold Wii back from a #1 market position – and a substantially larger-than-GameCube installed base – if Nintendo doesn’t start making changes sooner than later.
1) Nintendo is not innovating enough with the software selection. It’s been said before, “Is Nintendo obligated to innovate now?” The answer is yea, of course they are. It’s their whole mantra; the only way for them to “disrupt” anything is to differentiate everything. Adding motion control to existing play types alone doesn’t signify a revolution. The revolution will come from the new genres and game types that are born out of that controller and the console’s features. However different a multiplatform port will be on Wii, old games will still be old games, with traditional design and construction (sorry, EA).
The basis of this argument stems from the lineup. You gotta admit, before E3, people expected some groundbreakers for Wii’s early period. Instead, we get a buncha Cube sequels retrofitted to the Wiimote – Prime 3, Zelda, and Mario Galaxy come to mind – and to add to it, they even look like Cube software. That’s not to say they won’t be great or that i won’t play them, but where’s the Wii utopia we’ve been waiting for, with all the small budget big ideas that are supposed to change the face of the industry? Even going into next year, announced Wii titles are industry staples: the EA games, Dragonball, FF, Sonic. Doesn’t that seem counterintuitive to Nintendo’s message?
I know that part of Nintendo’s mission is to give gamers a “new way to play” the oldies, but this system won’t live up to its potential until it’s inspiring new kinds of games with its new ways to play- think of the difference in how (built for Wii) Wii Sports fluidly controls compared to (adapted to Wii) Red Steel’s reportedly wanky gameplay. And forget about resuscitating dormant franchises or renovating active ones. Get ambitious creators on Wii and let them have at it. Suda 51 and Kojima are a great start- take it from there. If you have to, allow indie devs to also play with Wii hardware instead of restricting them to the Virtual Console.
2) Most gamers will not betray Xbox or PlayStation. Part of this reason being linked to the previous one (and the next): Wii just isn’t proven yet. But what is proven is that, for at least the Xbox 360, Wii doesn’t stack up. No matter what NOA PR says, tech matters, and as 2 traditional consoles one on one, Wii can’t compete. Some may say wait a minute, GameCube did pretty well against the Xbox, but the difference between 360 and Wii is so much greater. HD or not, Wii doesn’t come close to the raw power of a 360, and that holds weight for consumers, well-informed or clueless. Another thing that’s proven is 360’s support. There are loads of solid games coming to it in 2006 that won’t be hitting Wii at any point, if you’re into the testosterone driven skew of that software. And while they’re definitely status quo, great games are great games, and they’ll continue to push the Hollywood-esque direction of modern game trends.
As long as Wii treads close to 360 and PS3 with software, people will fail to see the big difference, especially when devs try to create a middle ground between the motion functions of the Wii remote and the Dual Shake. Until Wii starts getting games that aren’t ports and exclusives set in established franchises or stories that it needs to work around, to create a sub-industry of bizarre, unfathomable new games around itself, Wii60 and PSWii combos will remain myths of the internet.
3) There won’t be enough new players to generate a dominant marketshare. This is the most conjecture based reason, but still worth thinking about. In one respect, the way Wii simplifies all the games we’re used to will open the door a little wider for the “non gamers” to jump in. Conversely, they’re still the same games – platformers with furry animals, WWII shooters, etc. Should someone judge these games by their covers, it’s doubtful that they’d be compelled to pick them up. I suppose this is the battle that marketing will face and box art will lose. Then again, Wii’s price might be the main difference maker here, reinforced by cheap(er by comparison) software and demo units.
And like someone mentioned the other day, 3rd parties missed the early boat for Wii. That brings up a fourth potential problem: the second gen stuff for Wii will be reliant on Nintendo and that’s an issue. Remember– rather, look at how that situation has benefited the barely loved GameCube. It was also said recently that Wii’s success will rely heavily on Nintendo’s first party offering, but the truth is that they’ll have to drive the entire console on their own for about a year and a half. I mean, Nintendo released what, 2 Cube games this year? 3, maybe 4? While the console transition and DS are somewhat to blame, I’m sure you don’t wanna be living off of Mario Galaxy for 6 months next year like how it was for RE4 last year.
Maybe i’m just overanxious, but i don’t understand how so many people are this excited for Wii when it hasn’t made good on its promises yet. We don’t know about WiiConnect24, how the Virtual Console will be treated, how the independant VC games will pan out, or what’ll happen with the points above. I get the whole potential thing and what it can bring, but i say wait till it blows your mind before getting distracted by the smoke blown at you.
Honestly, i don’t believe Wii will ever meet my idealistic expectations, but i hope it will do well enough to at least claim some kind of success in 4 years.
As far as the software goes, if the games doesn't come in a wide variety that will appeal to everyone, then it will fail, or perform on par with the cube. Honestly, when I first got my cube, I was optimistic, even though the launch lineup was lacklustre. Years went by, and some great games, came and went. It's funny, that I've seen so many Mario games come out for one system, it feels like the cow has been milked and then some. Tennis, golf, baseball, mario party etc…I was somewhat dissapointed when I learned that a game, with screenshots that were proven fake, on this website would never come out. Xenias it was.I am also excited about the Wii, even though the games aren't graphically stunning when compared to the other consoles, including the PC. -H-
I think electronic devices must be smaller and smaller over time, and that's why Wii is so small, becuase the Wii is a true console, with a simple an cool design, we dont need a very big console like the 360 which consumes a lot of watts (more than 100!!). In that aspect the Wii is a lot better. Also, graphics doesn't matter, your eyes won't be burned if you dont see "the mega cool graphics of the 360", graphics on Wii will be cool enough to be watchable and they won't burn your eyes. I think the 360 failed as a videogame console if you ask me.
Good article. We will see a lot of original stuff coming to the Wii. I Think that Nintendo knew that sony was going to include some kind of motion sensors on their controller and they preffer to keeping the secret.Dont forget that they have been thinking about this for quite a long time. Nintendo adquired the gryration rights in 2001. They are just being cautious.
lolof course graphics doesn't matter, if u can perfectly play with already wii graphics then u dont need more.People who worries about graphics are just either nerds or noobs.
Oh man, if you even payed attention to history, you'd know most of your points are flawed."1) Nintendo is not innovating enough with the software selection."What, Excite Truck, HAMMER, Wii Sports, Wii Music, and WarioWare aren't enough for you?"2) Most gamers will not betray Xbox or PlayStation."Did gamers betray Nintendo with the N64 for the largely unproven PlayStation? Yes. Gamers go where the games are, and the games are on Wii."3) There won't be enough new players to generate a dominant marketshare."Now this is just bollucks*. The entire country of Japan, young, old, male, female, have all bought a DS, and you know very well what that means: 100,000+ weekly DS sales. Get you history right, and your facts straight. Maybe then I'll come back to this asinine site.*I'm not even remotely British, I just like using the word.
@ USA w/eIf you think graphics aren't a part of the equation you are wrong. True gamers expect nothing less than stellar graphics.The only reason RE 4 was recognized was due to it's visual shine. Take a look at Crysis and you will see what graphics potential for the next gen will be, in game footage, as opposed to Killzone CGI.The DS route is ok, but in the end it will neglect those that want somehting else other than a new control style. -H-
Games were great despite 8-bt graphics back in the 80s. I think 'true gamers' realize that gameplay is what makes the game.While RE4 had very nice visuals, the graphics are not what made the game awesome.If you care about graphics over gameplay, go watch the grass grow.
You greatly overestimate the success of the 360. That is to say, it's basically non-existant.This site would be so much better without Rollin.
Why could anyone be excited about the Wii yet? Because it looks like a lot of fun, plain and simple.However, I do agree that the challenge for Nintendo is to first draw non-gamers into the system and then provide them with new types of games that they'll enjoy. Isn't that what Wii Sports is all about? As for the new and innovative games from indie developers. Those will come with time, I'm sure.Also, I agree with Remorsis 100%. Real gamers look for gameplay before graphics.
Older gamers look for gameplay before graphics. Newer gamers (the Playstation generation)look for graphics before gameplay. Not saying all do, just most.
"If you care about graphics over gameplay, go watch the grass grow."lol… rightly saidawesome graphics of realityit somehow… looks… so… real
@ PROF. AIBUA little tip from a Brit – you spell it "Bollocks":)And you're right, it is a good word to use!On Topic – good piece. It was the SEGA Head chap who was raging on about being first out the gate as a 3rd party.
Anon Said…"This site would be so much better without Rollin."Touuuuuuchy. You could make the site better.Get a name, make a peteition, get some balls.The Power is YOURS!!!A lot of people love 360. A lot of people own it.
It really is easy to spot a Rollin post. Mario Galaxy is retrofitted, eh? Everything in the demo made EXTENSIVE use of the Wiimote. Go back to your behind the scenes role, or start an x360 site.
I think half these statements HURT SONY and MICROSOFT, the two consoles that are EXACTLY the same in terms of VISUALS and POWER etc. are not going to help themselves by coming out with THE SAME THING, YEAR AFTER YEAR, with only flashier graphics. Wii is going to offer people a NEW WAY TO PLAY, if these arguments were true, then how come so many polls, magazines, and news sources are praising the system, if it HAS NOT DELIVERED???? If it didn't deliver, it would get more bad press than anything, people have gotten use to the name change and everything, and everyone loves it, and besides, like the writer says, it still hasn't launched!!!! So why are you going to already say it could fail, if you haven't seen everything yet????
Wii is the console that will seperate true game design from mainstream garbage that now saturates the market. The 360 and the PS3 have yet to "show me the money" in gameplay or originality. Graphics mean nothing compared to great gameplay. I'm a concept artist, so trust me, I get a lot out of nice visuals, yes. But in the long run the games I come back to and enjoy over and over for countless hours never seem to have stellar graphics. To be honest, that article is poor journalism and relatively unresearched. Innovation is vital to Nintendo's success, huh? Of course it is. Always has been, why do you think they've been in the business longer than anyone else out there? Look at the long list of companies who are no longer around becuase they refused to innovate like Atari, Sega, Acclaim just to name a few. Innovation is also vital to the industry as a whole, so that includes Sony and Microsoft. 360 sucks, nothing but sequels to XBOX games and most of those are getting worse reviews than the older versions. That's what happens when you have no innovation. If it was really all about graphics there'd be no such thing as portable or mobile gaming. MMOs would have never made a dime. And the PSOne would never gotten Sony to where they're at. But that was a long time ago and Sony has changed its game plan to resemble something along the lines of Panasonic's 3D0…over-priced, high-powered hardware that simply doesn't impress anyone in the long run. Give me a Dreamcast or a Gamecube any day over 360 or PS3. Hell, give me my 8- and 16-bit games! Thank God for the Wii. To Hell with Sony and Microsoft.
I'm going to echo and agree with many of the people who posted their thoughts here.PS3 and Xbox360 will be releasing the same games, literally and practically. Wii will do something different, and that's what will make it successful.And graphics dont matter. Look at Pong. People played Pong for hours and all that was was 2 rectangles, 1 square, and a black background. Get my point? It was (and in ways still is) fun. That's all it had to be!And to be honest, if it's too early to get excited about Wii, it's also too early to point out every mistake they might make. That's just my opinion.
But that would take the fun out of speculation
To Rollin and others whining about the Wii's alleged lack of visual prowess, I pose questions:How did you ever survive gaming before this upcoming generation of consoles? Did the 1st XBox's graphics make you want to vomit? If the Wii's capabilities aren't good enough for you, then by simple mathematic logic no console before it has been good enough.My theory: deep down inside, those who whine about graphics are less concerned with the actual graphics, and more concerned with the suckers' game that is this prepubescent virtual ****-measuring contest between short-sighted console fans.Wow. Just wow..
He's not whining about the Wii's graphics though is he? This is a solid article from Rollin, it's not pretending to be a serious piece of academic study and it doesn't need to be researched because it's "his" opinion. Just take it for what it is.And he's right Nintendo's big 3 traditional games: Metroid Prime (never liked the 3D incarnation but that's my own personal preference) and Zelda: TP both look like GC games even though they're set to appear on the GC's successor. Mario Galaxy looks a bit better but nothing that couldn't be achieved on the GC. He's also right about the controls: instead of using the Wii controller to build a game/franchise from the ground-up (as in Zelda: Phantom Hourglass or Starfox: Command or Mario & Donkey Kong 2), Nintendo have retro-fitted the controls to GC games with the result that the controls feel tacked on. In other words, instead of allowing games to form "from" the Wii controller the controls are being "forced" onto the game or franchise.I think it's vital that we keep an open mind and part of that is looking at counter-points, such as this article, to the prevailing Wii bandwagon.Remember when PS2 launched? It launched with NO "killer-apps" or must-have games. It had no games worthy of it's power – claimed or otherwise. At that time there was a growing band of opinion that said "Gamecube" was poised to take over where "Playstation" left off. In the end, Sony and 3rd parties got their act together, DVD video took off and Nintendo, who launched the GC 18 months after PS2 in Japan and 14 months after in the States was already facing an uphill struggle.Nintendo won't be late this time (all the indications are that it will launch slightly ahead of PS3) but can those who've bought DS (an intrinsically more casual pick-up-and-play device ie you open the lid, switch the power on and start playing) translate to commercial success in the home console arena where play is, by virtue of the fixed nature of the device, expected to be more deep and immersive?Compared to the DS and it's pick-up-and-play, play anywhere gaming will the public find the Wii relevant to their lives?We shall see…
nintendo holds out information as we all know. thats probably the main reason there all these games being adapted to the controller rather then built from the ground up. but this system wont fail. excluding handhelds, were gonna have every nintendo system wrapped up in one system. that alone is a seller. but the controller will come around. i think that we will see more inovative stuff come out for the wii than the ds, because the wii has alot more to work with. the ds suffers from not enough graphic capability and there fore innovative games come out in spurts i still love the system dont get me wrong. for now im waiting just to put down money on the wii just to ease my anticipation. Rollin we can always count on you to stir up controversy. i love though seeing people voice there thoughts.
Valid point, Rollin, but I think the statement "Nintendo is not innovating enough with the software selection" is a bit early. Would people introduce a "strange" device with "strange" content at the same time, people would be alienated. So, first strange device with traditional, yet slightly modified content. In a year or so, we'll be seeing the Wii equivalent of Brainage or Elektroplankton.
The argument that graphics do not matter is not valid at all. I don't think Nintendo themselves would even admit to that. However, with that being said, I think what message Nintendo is trying to give is that its not just the aspect of graphics, but the total package, including presentation, art style, music, audio, game play, storyline, tight controls, immersion, etc, etc. They want you to feel the game. It's similar to a movie with heavy and beautiful CGI, but no heart; that is not what Nintendo wants. They want you to be immersed, and have fun playing the Wii. A game having beautiful eye candy alone doesn't make the game fun or interesting. That being said, I'd have to agree with Prof. Aibou, and disagree with Rollins on all 3 points.1) Nintendo is not innovating enough with the software selection.They have a number of new IP's that are not sequels. Also, there seems to be decent 3rd party support. If you ask me, there seems to also be a very diverse selection for the first 6 months. Besides, this statement is a bit premature without actually seeing and experiencing these titles and just hearing about them. Some of the titles include Wii sports, Red Steel, Project hammer, Elebits, Disaster Day of crisis, Sadness, Heroes, etc, to name a few. Besides, we don't know everything about the system yet. There could be more innovations that are on the way that we don't know about.2) Most gamers will not betray Xbox or PlayStation. The 3rd party developers will go to the system that is most successful. If Wii becomes that, the developers will sway that way; there is no loyalty, just money. There are already a number of exclusives coming to the Wii, so I'm not sure what you are talking about.3) There won't be enough new players to generate a dominant marketshare.I don't see how anyone can predict this. Currently, video games as an entertainment medium is not as big as television, movies, books or music. The Wii has the potential to change this because it is targeting all gamers, even new ones to enter the fold and increase the gaming population. The Wii console has the potential to entice these new people, and show them why interactive entertainment (sounds better than video games) can be fun. The Wii could be a runaway hit, potentially, we will have to see. If it can duplicate the success of the DS and then some, it could change everything, especially most people's negative perceptions of video games and the people that play them. All of us commenting here on this website knows that video games is the best form of entertainment right?
As much as I like to see a successful Nintendo… I have a lot of doubts.Everybody declared Nintendo Wii the winner of E3 2006, while I only saw a machine that appealed to hardcore gamers only. Also I've never heard anybody outside of my friends with consoles talking about the Wii – remember it should be the new console for all the non-gamers etc.etc.?I'm very concerned about the Wii because IMHO everything Nintendo showed on E3 2006 was not enough. It did nothing to convince me to buy the console – All I want is my NEW Zelda with classic control scheme – not a good sign, eh?I hope Nintendo is absolutely sure about what strategy they want to follow – because the time is ripe.
This article is good, but some of the things that they say is utterly rubbish…Starting with the fact that bashing the Wii because it can't innovate at the start of it's life cycle with new games and new game types, well with the DS happened the same thing and see where it is right now! Time it's what the console needs…Secondly, telling me that Super Mario Galaxy is not an innovation/revolution, you can only be mentioning it's looks because I can't see any of the other game consoles manage to have the concept behind this game, or any other game that uses the same concept…I think that just because a game uses already established franchises, doesn't mean that they are not able to differentiate themselves from the previous interations of the same… Super Mario 64 (which was a revolution in itself) comes to mind!And if, new games and new types it's all you're asking for then think again because hardcore gamers/Nintendo fans are more likely to defect in case they find themselves with only "touch generation" type of games available to their Wii console.Last but not least, if Nintendo changed the name of their console from Revolution to Wii, was mainly because Wii is a transition console and not a complete new revolution since it's retro-compatible with every Nintendo home console and is almost a GameCube in itself (the memory card and controller ports come to mind).
One thought regarding the Wii's lack of launch content to cater to non-gamers: The Wii, like every other system, will sell out immediately to the hardcore who are willing to pay double the price on eBay. Non-gamers and casual gamers will NOT line up for a game system because of just that; they are casual. Zelda, Metroid, Mario, these games are meant to generate immediate EXCITEMENT when compared to Sony and Microsoft. After a few months, when you can walk in and buy a system off the shelf without needing a ticket with a number, you'll be seeing stuf like the Bob Ross Wii Painters Pack, and this is the kind of product that will catch the eye of the non-gamer.
i say gameplay is what maters not only graphics.Wii have good graphics to start with anyways and is going to have great gameplay. if graphics were all that materd then we should just be watching DVD-videos I vote Wii gameplay over x-box360 and PS3 graphics any day