Slashdot Mirror
Miyamoto on Wiimakes, Dead-End Design
GameDaily is reporting on an interview that Nintendo Dream scored with legendary designer Shigeru Miyamoto. Mr. Miyamoto spoke about the future of design and Wii gaming during the interview, touching on several interesting topics. Older Gamecube titles, for example, may be remade for the Wii at some point in the future to take advantage of the console's unique control scheme. There are no announcements of which titles might see this treatment, but he seemed confident that if it does happen the pricepoint would be rather low. In some more high-level comments, Mr. Miyamoto stated that game designers have come to a dead-end as regards gaming today. Not sparing his own company, the designer thinks that future titles will have to come at gaming from a very different perspective if they are to succeed.
They should be able to use the original disc, and have the game be locally patched to handle the Wii's control scheme. I wouldn't mind paying $5 for some Metroid Prime goodness.
if the full game was for sale, and not just a patch. Then I could get GC games that I don't already have on the cheap.
Everything I say is a lie. Except that... and that... and that, and that, and that, and that... and that.
You have planned to launch a system with a fundamentally different interface from what people are used to. How to optimally exploit this for fun games is not obvious, because it's very out-of-the-box. The more minds you can have working on this, the better. This is even more important than on rival consoles because of the immensely-greater possibilities. If you really want to discover the most innovative uses of the Wiimote, you're going to need to let hobbyists buy the (fortunately affordable) SDK. Even if their version is bad, if they hit on a good use no one though of, that can become an instant console-seller. Why keep your restrictive policies about the size of developers you'll sell to?
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
The Wii controller just isn't 'innovative'
There, I said it. Nintendo is really on dangerous ground in the console market if they really intend to make the Wii controller the centerpiece of their entire console strategy. Almost every Wii game shown so far shows that all gaming input comes down to a set of continuous(joystick,mouse,pointer(Wiimote)) and discrete(button,(Wii gestures)) input.
The Wii controller talk about 'actually swinging your controller like a sword' or 'use the controller like a fishing rod' reminds me of the race back in the late 80s rpg/adventure games where developers kept adding more and more real world actions to their games. Feeding, equipping items, moving/manipulating objects in the world. In the end it became tedious.
So far Wii games appear to be broken down in to two categories - games that are simple mappings of control schemes on to the Wii(Joystick input->Wii aiming) and (Button presses -> Wii gestures/button presses) and a few games that mimic real world actions.
I don't need to re-buy a souped up GameCube for the first type - I have one already and it works fine. And I don't want the second type anymore than those old games where you had to manually perform every real world action.
I bet you would be one of the cavemen who'd say fire is a gimmick.
There, I said it. Never before has there been a consumer interface device with the following properties:
;) The rest of us can't wait to wave our hands around like idiots and laugh while we do it!
1 - Full 3D spatial location tracking
2 - Accelerometer
3 - Gyroscope
It is the combination of all these things that make the controller TRULY innovative, not just innovative in the sense that it is going against the current grain of "more buttonz everywherez". Imagine the effects this controller can have on a game - Splinter Cell's lockpicking mini-game is no longer a matter of jiggling joysticks. You actually have to reach TOWARD the television in order to slide the pins in. Trauma Center will not need a special zoom tool anymore - just reach toward the TV, and it will zoom the image for you! Even launch titles like Twilight Princess are using this to let you actually draw your bow and arrow back.
I don't know how you can possibly say that this approach is not "innovative". You might not personally like it, and that's fine. A lot of people dislike fun! That's why the PS3 exists
I would love to see a Wind Waker Wii-make with all the features Miyamoto had originally planned for it. I know that in atleast one article I read years ago he said there was supposed to be atleast two more dungeons and the hunt for the Triforce wasn't supposed to be an annoying romp across the ocean.
Eternal Darkness would also be a really cool game for a Wiimake.
Depends ... are we talking about mere cantrips, or a fireball?
I know I'm feeding a troll here, but Nintendo has never stated that they think scores of non-gamers are out there wating with bated breath for a console made just for them. They have repeatedly stated that modern console systems are tough to get into if you are ouside of the gamer group. They have repeatedly stated that they hope the familiar "remote" shape of the controller and the intuitive control will help make non-gamers feel comfortable. Whether this works out the way they would like, is to be decided starting this fall.
The Wii controller talk about 'actually swinging your controller like a sword' or 'use the controller like a fishing rod' reminds me of the race back in the late 80s rpg/adventure games where developers kept adding more and more real world actions to their games. Feeding, equipping items, moving/manipulating objects in the world. In the end it became tedious.
I have not one idea how you think those two things are comparable. If it were somehow the case that games would, by definition, use the Wiimote to make the user constantly open a backpack and equip items in Zelda, that would be one thing -- but I don't see how the one thing leads to the other. If you're just saying that the Wiimote actions will necessarily become too repetitive, I'm lost as to why they're any more or less "tedious" than the blank-eyed button pressing on other controllers and consoles.
(Frankly, too, I've been around a while and I don't remember the supposed phase you're describing in rgps and adventure games.)
Your idea that, because the Wiimote can result in some of the same actions that button presses and joystick controls can cause on-screen, it's somehow not innovative -- that would dismiss such changes as analog controls as also not being innovative. After all, we could move characters on screen before them, right?
Finally, your argument begs the question: Nintendo is treading on thin ice next to what competition? The $600 "buy our HDVD standard product"? Do you have some idea that actually would be "innovative" in your book? Or what?
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
What would happen if some companies decide to re-release previous PS2/X-Box titles on the Wii *Imagine Katamari Damacy, Kingdom Hearts, Contra: Shattered Soldier, Ninja Gaiden, Star Wars: KOTOR, and Soul Calibur 3 on the Wii*
But it won't be enough to save Nintendo.
What makes you think that Nintendo needs to be saved?
I don't have the link to the analysis anymore but I have seen people who looked into the financial statements of Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo over the past 5 years and Nintendo made as much of a profit as Sony (the whole company, not just the games division) over that time frame; on the other hand, Sony has been seeing declining profits (or increasing losses) in practically every division except for their financial/insurance division and their games division is one of the few profitable divisions. Sony is betting that the PS3 can drive the sales of HDTVs, surround sound systems, and Blu-Ray movies in order to make most of their divisions profitable again.
The Wii will probably sell at least as many systems as the Gamecube, the Virtual Console will easily become a cash cow as people re-buy games they have already purchased, and the unique Wiimote will drive the sales of Nintendo developed software (because Nintendo is one of the best companies for inovating with a new input device). Meanwhile the DS is more popular then the GBA was, its selling massive quantities of Nintendo software, and looks to continue performing well. Nintendo will be fine.
Sony (on the other hand) will probably sell less PS3s then they sold PS2, will be forced (by Microsoft) to sell them at a loss for most of the generation, will see lower software sales from higher game costs ($60-$70 per title) and a smaller user base, will see lower profits from each sale from higher development costs, will face greater marketing costs from the contining falure of the PSP, and so on.
Sony is in some rough shape, and it can only get worse
It seems a lot of people on internet fourms don't consider the possibly of the DS keeping the Wii market share low. There is a big difference with casual mobile and casual on the console. Also the recent Xbox Live arcade has more to do with the lack of titles than the appeal of the actual games. What happens if you can get the same title for DS as Wii? Which do you think people would buy? This is one of the ideas leading analysts to think of Wii as a '3rd place' in next gen. Once it gets down to the SNES and 'arcade' titles people will want to play those on DS more than Wii.
Hi, thanks for your message. Unfortunately, Slashdot isn't my personal messaging system, so I didn't read one word of whatever you said. Regardless, I hope you enjoy Twilight Princess!
Love,
Shigeru "Important People Don't Read Slashdot" Miyamoto
OMG! Wau!
People complain that games have sequels and are becoming derivative more and more, and I don't see anyone bitching about the fact that Nintendo wants to release remakes (albeit at lower prices) of Gamecube games with different controls. There goes your innovation. Why isn't anyone picking up on this? Oh right... this is Nintendo, they can't do anything wrong now because of the Wiimote. Besides, why would I want to buy the same game with different control mechanics when I've already played it through before multiple times?
But if you look at all the games that have been "successful" lately, they are basically sequels or taking a genre and doing it better. HL2, CivIV, WoW (not a sequel, but is the best MMORPG to date -- well, most popular in any case), etc etc. To be a success, a game needs to be enjoyable and pay attention to detail. This is true if it is a Wii game or a 360 game. To take games in a new direction has a lot of risk. Even great games get overlooked if all the variables don't fall in to place. I honestly don't care if a game is innovative. I just care that it is done well.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I disagree with Miyamoto's statement that developers have come to a dead-end. Gaming is far from having it a dead-end.
Gaming may be a bit stagnant, but that's the fault of excessive budgets, marketing departments and the gamers themselves who seem to thrive on more of the same.
It definitely isn't because of technological limitations and an unconventional controller isn't going to change everything. The Wii controller allows for some new variations on gameplay but ultimately it's just another control device. What I've seen for the Wii thus far takes existing genres and merely provides a new control scheme. The DS is the same. It hasn't really innovated gameplay, it just introduced gameplay previously nonexistant in the console world. Many of those DS games feel like little more than glorified flash games.
Which brings me to something else... I don't think credit is being given where it's due. The true innovators have been Flash and indie game developers. They're the ones who've really introduced new concepts and have improved existing concepts. There's a lot of crap out there, but the good stuff truly stands out. And the relative simplicity and easy accessibility has allowed Flash games to be popular amongst non-gamers.
One device that has really enabled this kind of gameplay has been the mouse. It's more precise than almost anything else out there and it's very simply to use. Put a mouse in the most inept person's hand and they'll figure out how it works rather quickly. I doubt the Wii controller will even have that kind of ease of use.
This is not to discount Nintendo. They certainly know what they're doing. First of all, they were smart distinguish themselves from the competitors. And secondly, they wisely they've been focusing on gameplay. They brought that intuitive gameplay to consoles.
Whether it pays off in the long run remains to be seen. The average gamer may be drawn to Nintendo, but attractive non-gamers is far from certain. These are the kinds of people who I expect who would have more experience with PCs than they do with conoles. Spending $50 on a game is a far cry from spending $200+ on a console and then another $50 on a game. Additionally, given that there is so much gaming to be had online for free they may be even more reluctant to spend money especially if they realize they wont have much time to play anyway.
Japan doesn't make for a good comparison with the rest of the world simply because more age groups there are open to new technologies. You don't see middle-aged men anywhere in the world reading comic books on trains like you do in Japan. It's only natural that many more older people there would be buying these consoles. People elsewhere might find a particular game curious, but whether that's another to motivate them to actually go out and spend the money is another story.
Also, keep in mind that there are quite a few people out there who really do want more of the same old crap. I know quite a few people who will immediately dismiss a game if it doesn't have the latest graphics, isn't a FPS or doesn't have an adult theme. There is a reason American companies keep pumping out FPS and sports games, just like there's a reason Japanese companies keep pumping out RPGs and fighting games.
I really don't know because I (like everyone on this message board) don't know how powerful the Wii is, I can only speculate; looking at the form factor, cost and manufacturing process I personally suspect a 1GHz to 2GHz PowerPC 970MP based CPU (theoritically, 5 to 10 times as powerful as the Gekko; in real world applications probably closer to 2.5 to 5 times as powerful though). In this power range you could (probably) include many of the features of Euphoria but (maybe) not everything. Just remember LucasArts could easily have some other reasons why it is not on the Wii.
One core problem I see with the Wii is its lack of CPU power. Now you might say that CPU power isn't that important for a fun game
Well, I would say that
1 - Nintendo has not released hardware specs yet
2 - We've seen in-game videos and they certainly look good enough for me
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
There are a lot of ways to solve the various dynamic action problems, some of which would be very CPU-intensive but some that wouldn't.
:^)
For example, Project HAMMER looks like it does a lot of what you're talking about, turning freeform controller movement into big action/reaction stuff on-screen. There's probably not an ultra-sophisticated physics engine calculating impacts, modeled using complex inertia and friction attributes, but rather much simpler algorithms that plug the angle and velocity of the user's input into simple functions that change the action onscreen. Some kind of middle ground between all-out dynamic collision computation and a collection of preset animations.
There are plenty of other possibilities too. Watching the videos of Super Mario Galaxy, I can't reconcile what's going on with any physics engine I know of. The game's world is its own crazy and wonderful thing where yes, you have direct and precise control that translates into unique reactions, but all on its own terms - outside the "physics calculations are complciated" world we're familiar with.
Nothing's stopping a developer from using an internally simpler approach and mapping it to a realistic game world, either. Even on GameCube, Resident Evil 4 looked realistic but used very primitive methods of collision detection and motion. You could shoot down an axe that was thrown at you, not because the physics were perfectly modeled or because the aiming mechanics were perfectly precise, but actually because they weren't. It still felt real though, thanks to the game's presentation and style. I bet we'll see plenty of stuff that looks for the world like every action is completely dynamic, whether or not it actually is. Don't underestimate the power of faking it!
This is not about look, but about "feel". Sure a Wii game can look good, the question however is will it behave realistically, ie. will there be physic simulation to handle your Wiimote sword swings and such? No matter how good the graphics are, if the feedback you get from the game world is nothing more then a pre-scripted animation all you Wiimote sword swings will be basically useless, since they don't influence the world in an indivulial way.
Its true that Nintendo hasn't released any final specs, however so far there is nothing even hinting that it will come anywhere near XBox360 or PS3, neither in GPU or CPU power. And the demonstrated Wii games so far arn't exactly impressive either Mario, Zelda and Metroid look a bit better then on the Cube, but not really that much better, so Wii speed will be better then Gamecube, but not that much better, especially since Wii games already should be a lot more optimized then XBox360 or PS3 games due to the familiar single-processor architecture of the Wii vs the multi core architecture of the others.
This is not about look, but about "feel". Sure a Wii game can look good, the question however is will it behave realistically
:) I would rate the improvements I've seen a bit higher than you, but can't completely disagree. Then again, I was at Leipzig Game Convention today and while there was no Wii I got to see many games and trailers (a new MGS4 among other PS3 stuff). I thought the PS3 stuff looked very uneven, some was amazing, some was a let-down, and this even within the same game. 360 looked very good if done well, if a little glossy. But the important thing: an hour into the event I didn't care anymore.
Sorry, I realize that I expressed myself poorly. What I meant was the realism of animations and such. I'm not interested so much in simulation, I want games. I work between 40 and 80 hours a week at my job, I don't need another 20 as a spy or managing a theme park. Not everything has to be life-like.
ie. will there be physic simulation to handle your Wiimote sword swings and such? (...)
That's a good point though, regardless of what I have said above. Still, they haven't released specs. At this point I trust Nintendo that they are not stupid - if one company knows about gameplay, it's Nintendo. Also, IIRC their statement that they haven't revealed all features yet still stands (the Leipzig press conference, despite all the hype, was a bore). There were once rumours about a physics chip too and, again IIRC, some Nintendo person when asked didn't categorically deny it.
Then again, your suspicion might be correct.
Its true that Nintendo hasn't released any final specs, however so far there is nothing even hinting that it will come anywhere near XBox360 or PS3, neither in GPU or CPU power.
Of course. Nothing else was ever said. There are several things that have to be taken into account though (e.g., HD, insane complexity of PS3).
And the demonstrated Wii games so far arn't exactly impressive either Mario, Zelda and Metroid look a bit better then on the Cube, but not really that much better, so Wii speed will be better then Gamecube, but not that much better, especially since Wii games already should be a lot more optimized then XBox360 or PS3 games due to the familiar single-processor architecture of the Wii vs the multi core architecture of the others.
I guess we'll have to wait until TGS
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Project Hammer actually looks like a regual current generation hack&slay game, it doesn't seem to make all that much use of the Wiimote, you juggle around a bit here and there with the Wiimote, but all stuff gets translated into generic standard actions, at least as far as I can tell from the few videos that are around from the game.
SuperMarioGalaxy doesn't look different either, juggling the controller lets Mario spin and beside from that you can click around on the screen with a mouse-pointer that you control with the Wiimote.
I am thinking more about the games that actually allow you to directly control your weapon, ie. Red Steel as a lot of people imagined it and how it not turned out to be (no real sword swinging in that game so far, just generic actions that have little todo with your actual movements). Now ResidentEvil4 looks of course nice, but its really more sidestepping the issue then solving it. The core issue is simply that direct control would require more sophisticated physical simulation on the game site, one can of course 'solve' that by not allowing direct control in the first place, which all games so far seem to do, but it really means that the Wii would fall flat of what a lot of people expect it to be. Time will tell how it really turns out.
I know "Wind Waker" is not a typo, but sheesh, talk about iffy game titles -- all it brings to mind is summer camp games of fennis...
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
I'll admit the jury's out on HAMMER. It looks to me like there's more going on than prescripted animations, but I could be wrong or overly-optimistic or something.
...It's not even that gesturing is bad, we just want our light saber game, dammit! :^)
Mario Galaxy includes some funky gravity hubs that, when pointed to, attract Mario according to the game's own playful sense of physics. More interestingly, though, hop onto a springy tree-looking thing and you can use the Wiimote to slingshot Mario off of it, quite accurately aiming and determining force within the game's own world. That's the sort of thing I was talking about - real 1:1 action/reaction with the controller, without the need for complex real-world physics.
The Red Steel developers say they're working again on revamped control that's more like what you're talking about. Whether that will come to fruition versus their generic gesturing system, we can only hope. I seriously doubt it was a CPU issue though. Bigger problems arise from the fact that you can swing out in front of you even if you're facing a wall, and how do you reconcile that in the game without putting in too many limitations or hacks that interfere with the 1:1 Wiimote to virtual sword movement.
Are "sidestepping" the direct control issue and "solving" it really mutually exclusive? I'm not convinced that a huge amount of CPU cycles need to be spent to result in physical simulation that looks and feels pretty damn good, even if the underlying algorithms are actually not very sophisticated. Asteroids felt like it understood inertia, momentum, and angular collisions, but what that Atari 2600 was doing under the hood was much more simplistic.
I'll agree that an easy way out for the developers would be to say, "Well, let's just put in a bunch of pre-scripted animations and build a gesture system to sort-of match - there's not enough CPU for a proper physics engine". But I think a more clever developer would be more tempted to take that direct input and map it to some flexible and well-designed reactions that feel just right 99% of the time.
Yep, that sounds exactly like the thing I want to have, even without all the dynamic animation stuff that would at least be a step in the right direction. Wiimote really needs to map 1:1 into the game, else a lot of the intuitiveness could be lost. ProjectHammer for example looks like it has a quite large delay between swinging the Wiimote and actually swinging the Hammer in the game, most likly because time is wasted to detect the Wiimote stroke and then again to launch the apropriat pregenerated action, so the game always lacks behind your actions. A real 1:1 mapping from Wiimote to Hammer could of course reduce the delay to pretty much zero.
Its also a development issue. LucasArts Euphoria is still rather new and beside some tech demos we havn't seen anything actually using it and the first game to release using it won't be available for quite a few month, maybe a year or more. No idea if other developers have even started implementing similar stuff. So yep, its more then just lack of CPU, but I also doubt that you can do that stuff without quite a bit of free CPU, since it goes bejoint just the classic box-physics and contains beside the character behaviour stuff like realistically breaking wood and other materials (it will splinter and break exactly where you hit it).
I would say so, that of course doesn't stop the Wii from being successfull or the games from being good, but it would rule out quite a few interesting gameplay ideas or at least cut their potential down quite a bit. In the end its of course the gameplay that matters, not the physics engine, but physics engine can play a larger part of the game experince and especially with Euphoria it really looks like it could provide 'nextgen gameplay'. Ok, that is LucasArts marketing speech, but the improvments are similar like the jump from prerendered-3D to realtime-3D, not really obvious at first, but they may change the way games are done quite fundamentally. Ironically of course the XBox360 lacks the controller to really make full use of Euphoria and if the PS3s motion detection is actually up to the task we will see. Will probally take a while till we actually see the true nextgen games, so far, almost everything, no matter what console, is still pretty much the same as the last gen and developers, as always, need to actually figure out what to do with all the new power and controls.
ie. will there be physic simulation to handle your Wiimote sword swings and such?
Word has it (unconfirmed of course) that the Wii houses a Physics processing unit... this is only speculation at this stage in the game, but I do seem to remember reading interviews with a few developers who are working on Wii titles, and they mentioned working with the PPU.
To further this speculation, I would say that if there is a PPU, we can expect all sorts of cool rag-doll-esque physics effects in coming Wii games.
5468652047616D65
I'd add some things to what you say though - the fact that the Wii is NOT truly a next gen console, but rather a last gen console with gimmick a controller (even if it winds up being a great gimmick), is going to catch up with it. This is a system just slightly more powerful than the XBOX, note that that's the XBOX not the XBOX 360. This is probabably fine for Christmas 2006, but it's going to look like a relic next year, and how will a 8 year old console (technologically) sell a year after that against $300~200 360's & PS3's?
It all comes back to the controller being revolutionary, and I don't see it. Everyone will want to try it and knowing Nintendo, there will be some gaming gems, but it's not going to bring back the 'awe' for gaming. This is a new age power glove and it's the crux of the whole console, rather then an add-in. Even if this new power glove is great, it's not going to be great for long and it isn't going to make 8 year old looking games any better.
Finally, I am not going to say that Nintendo will fail by pursuing the 'low end' here, but this definitely means handing off any chance of the crown. Even if it sees some success, the Wii will be a bigger threat to the market for last gen consoles/games, the PS2 & XBOX, than it is to the 360 & PS3. Since that's where people not inclined to spend top dollar get their games.
Yeah. I can tell you that I believe that I believe the reason that Sony is losing money, is that all Sony has been building is crap, partly because it got people into buying there computers and monitors(which, all the cd drives in our house have stopped using after owning, and having the computer on for about 2 years(every one, and we have about 4 Sony comps in our house). Also, most of Sony's income was taken out when microsoft announced and released the xbox. at $600 I could build myself a decent(not great, but decent) AMD computer. That $600 for about, say, oh, $450 in hardware, is what is going to keep many people from buying the system. However, the ps3 will have free online, of which I have not heard anything about the wii being online. Most likely, it should.
FYI: The number of kids that buy the Pokemon games could probably keep Nintendo afloat for quite a while.
P.S. Besides, the Wii will be cooler, and, hopefully, will look more fun to those that dont normally play games(adding more income to Nintendo)
You seem to be forgetting that Wii only needs to push around a quarter of the pixels the other next-gen consoles need to push around, since it doesn't support HD. In other words, you get vastly improved graphics - they just aren't HD.
I know that you are probably a Sony or Microsoft shill, so I'll stop right there. Needless to say, you are either employed by a competitor or a mindless fanboy desperate to flame Nintendo because they get all the positive press this time around.
Clever signature text goes here.