Slashdot Mirror
Where the Wii Fits In
AGFlamey writes "On Angry Gamer is an interesting and lengthy article about the new direction Nintendo are taking with the Wii and in particular "non-games" like Wii Fit and Big Brain Academy. From the article: "Hardcore folks don't like to admit it, but Mario and Zelda are relics of the past. It's become quite clear that Nintendo is losing interest in remaking the same old games over and over. They want to pull us into something new, if only we can give them the chance." Is it such a bad thing that Nintendo are neglecting their roots?"
Don't count out the classics just yet. AAA titles like Mario, Zelda, and Metroid are pretty much the main attraction for Nintendo fans, and without them, Nintendo wouldn't be able to support itself with novelty alone. AAA titles have always been Nintendo's pillar of strength, and the only reason they didn't call it quits when the Gamecube lost out last time round.
Zelda Twilight princess and Super Mario Galaxy not to mention the upcoming Metroid shooter kind of make this guys argument seem silly. Nintendo is pursuing the casual gamer but they are not about to "neglect their roots."
In case you have forgotten, the old lines are the better sellers. Among all the newer things like wii sports, and many others, Mario and Zelda still have a huge fan base and still sell. It is not a bad thing that Nintendo is moving for more lines, but they should still keep the old tried and true (and the better) series until sales begin to drop (which they never will, if the quality keeps up and only when fans become bored). I still play all the older sets, and my friends still do, and we all find enjoyment in things like Smash and Zelda and Starfox and mario party.
They are simply growing branches.
What they're trying to do is create an entertainment console that everyone, not just hardcore FPS gamers, can have a go at. There are far more ordinary people out there than hardcore gamers (that market is pretty much completely saturated), and this is probably why some people from Microsoft and Sony have got surprised and upset over the success of the Wii.
When will there be a store which actually has a Wii for sale to go along with their fancy store display?
A market where each company is pursing a somewhat different customer base is better for consumers and better for the companies involved.
Which would you rather have, a choice between three consoles who are all somewhat different, each catering to a different set of gamers, or a market where all three console manufacturers shipped boxes that were essentially identical and catered to only a narrow market?
Whining about the Wii being too casual is like whining about how Cheerios don't taste like Frosted Flakes. If you don't like the Cheerios, just buy the fucking Frosted Flakes!
The cake is a pie
LOL... I thought the same thing. Nintendo made sure to get it's classics out right away. Now that they have a solid library of base games they're branching out and trying new things. There are even some new Mario games on the way. I think that the author kind of missed the point, but it's interesting to think about the new directions that nintendo is opening up.
I think that new types of games are a necessary thing, and focusing on new types of gameplay is a very good move by nintendo that will benefit the entire industry. Microsoft and Sony systems now have production and development costs that are so high that the manufacturers cannot afford to take risks, but nintendo not only is focusing on the gameplay with their in-house development, but they also have begun to open the platform to independent developers so we can start to see a bunch of great smaller titles in the future.
Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
I don't want to get into any elitist intellectualizing about this, but there are a lot of hardcore gamers who have ignored Nintendo for a long time as a kiddie console. These gamers have grown up on the standard games that have become the 360 and PS3's stock in trade: mass market sports and Michael Bay action.
I think Nintendo has done a very smart thing by leaving Sony and MS alone to play out the tragedy we've seen many times before (e.g. ATI vs. NVidia). Trying to win a 3-way graphics battle is a losing proposition, so what other direction can video gaming go in? How about instead of increasing the number of pixel shaders or whatever, increase the ways that people can control a game? In the same way that we have not seen what the PS3 is capable of with its nine graphics cores and blah blah blah, we have not seen the limits of what the Wii control scheme offers.
So now we have a lot of gamers who grew up on the PS2 who now have become site writers and game reviewers, and they just can not make sense of the Wii's appeal. They start to use epithets like Grandparents and throw a giggly aside at "Cookin' Mama" about how it's kind of cool but what's the point? The Wii has caused tremendous congnitive dissonance in the gaming industry and it just so happens that a lot of loud people are writing about it.
The Wii is as significant a transition as the move to D-button gamepad controllers (Nintendo again), and now all of these game writers who are dependent on their DualShock style controllers are pissed that FIFA 08 doesn't come out for months and months so they turn their frustration to the console that *is* getting popular and playable games throughout its launch honeymoon. PS3 and 360 people are stuck waiting for the next wave and convincing themselves they like to using motion sense mode in Motorstorm.
When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
And prior to the most recent generation of games, Mario was somehow hardcore only or completely different?
The only major change that Mario has undergone is a transition from 2D to 3D, but beyond that the game hasn't changed a lot. If you think the new Mario games are too easy have you ever collected all 120 stars in any of the more recent titles? It's not too terribly hard to collect enough stars to fight the final boss and beat the game, but to collect every single star requires a lot more effort. It's a game that's accessible to most people who are able to work the controller. You can do the bare minimum and finish the game, or you can collect everything. It's fairly accomodating.
I'd say the only major change is that the new 3D Mario games are on a whole less accessible to people than the old 2D games. I think using more simplified control methods make these games available to other audiances who would not have given them a chance otherwise.
I also fail to see how Zelda isn't "feeling its roots lately either." The last incarnation of the game in Twilight Princess was easily the best since Ocarina of Time and in some ways surpassed that game. I had a great time with Twilight Princess and it's one of those games that can easily suck up forty hours of your life. I fail to see how a game like this with dungeons that can take hours to fully explore and solve can be labled as more casual. If anything, Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass make the game more accessible with their new control schemes while at the same time providing a new and novel approach for vetrens of the series. Repackaging the same exact game over and over with a slightly different story doesn't necessarily make a game good or exciting.
Don't mistake more accessible for more casual. Accessible means that more people are able to pick it up and play it and enjoy their experience. Casual means that they are able to do this while not devoting hours to it at a time in order to enjoy it.
I was really big into video games from the old Atari onwards. I found, later on, that the games stopped being fun for me. I am not the core demographic that these games are written for, and I understand that. I am old, female, and not exactly the first person shooter type. Nor, am I the sims kind of play house person.
I found several titles on each system that were weird cheap offshoot games, that I liked. I am not, and have never been interested in how hard a game was. I want fun games.
I got the Wii, with some trepidation, as I was beginning to think buying game consoles would just net me another system with a couple dozen unfinished games on it.
Six weeks ago, I got the Wii, with Raymans Rabbid Rabbits, Zelda, and just recently got Resident evil 4. My husband is a more hardcore gamer type, and loves RE4. I have nearly finished RRRs, and just started Zelda. It's been a long time since I put in 13 hours on a game with no stops.
I plan to get Brain Age, and the workout one. I already have Metroid on pre-purchase.
I feel like the 360 (not going to even talk about PS3) is geared towards harder games for the sake of being hard. Plus the games come in the same genres. FPS, RPG, race or sports. I have played those over and over in every incarnation. I am big on RPGs, and have played those since the Atari Adventure. I want something different. The Wii has those original styles of games for me, and all sorts of quirky new stuff.
I just don't have time in my life for the same stuff, made harder by pixel hunts and artificial toughness levels, to be the same crap. At least now, with games like Raymans Rabbid Rabbits, I can laugh hysterically with my friends while we hunt rabbits with plungers. (Tip: Punch your friend in the arm, and you get to shoot more rabbits than them!)
Nothing hides evidence like a stew. -Gus Pratt
At this point, I think that the term "hardcore" really means "catering to crude adolescent power fantasies and sexual frustration" more than anything else.
Maybe that explains why the title of the article is "Where the Wii fits in".