Slashdot Mirror
Great Preview Video of Mario Super Sluggers
Kotaku has what looks to be a great preview video of Mario Super Sluggers, seemingly ripped from the Japanese Nintendo Channel. The video is quite long and does a great job of showcasing the game's control set. While the controls look relatively limited (especially the pitching), haven't we all wished for a few bombs to throw on those unfortunate pop-ups?
Nintendo has spent 20 years establishing brand recognition for a large quite of characters, headlined by Mario. They're never going to drop him as their primary star. They do have lots of games, most of which don't star Mario.
I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
Dude, they're already here. Have you played No More Heroes yet?
meta review
trailer
idm owns me
I invite you to explain to me exactly what a "hardcore" gamer is. In addition, please explain why I - being a person in possession of a Wii and a DS, who plays approximately an hour on the former and half an hour on the latter each and every day - is not within your arbitrary definition of "hardcore".
Why does absolutely no developer actually use the damn wii-control in the way people want/expect. Take Zelda - you expect Link to mimic your slashes in how you move the wiimote, instead you just shake it to get it to attack. It just serves as a funky way to push a button - shake = B.
Take this game and its pitching, from the video, - how would you expect to pitch with the wiimote. Obviously, how you pitch in real life. It would take the velocity of your swing, the twist of your hand, the motion and direction into account for a pitch. Instead we get the same fucking motion-equivalent-to-button-push bullshit. Watch the video, you pitch by tilting your hand down. Who the fuck pitches by tilting their hand down. The tilt down can easily be replaced by a button press, since they serve the same purpose. If you want to immerse people in the game with unique controls, why the hell don't the actually do it. How is tilting down a controller to pitch any more immersive than pressing a button.
I have been very, very disapointed by the Wii, since it seems that no one, apparently not even Nintendo, cares to make a game that actually uses the wii-mote in any meaningful way besides as a crosshair or as simply being another way to push a button (shake to attack!). The game that came closest to something like this was Boxing in Wii Sports. Sure it was flawed, but it gave a hint about how to make immersive gaming by showing how to use the controls to that effect. Everyone waited for a boxing-like game to come out, one that was more polished and really responsive - basically just improve upon what seems like a tech demo in Wii Sports. But it doesn't exist, hasn't been made.
At this point I'm beginning to wonder about the limitations of the wii-mote. It seems to me that the lack of games that we expect for the system - those with immersive, direct controls - may be fueled not by developers simply being lazy, but by the limits of what the wii-mote can do. Maybe we can never have a Zelda where the player directly controls his sword because its simply not possible with the wii-mote. Maybe we will never have a responsive boxing game because the wii-mote simply isn't responsive enough to do it. These are the things I and everyone expected from the system. Instead we have games that simply use the motions as buttons (does spinning in Mario Galaxy by shaking the wii-mote offer any benefit over a button?) or others that straight-up tell you to use a regular controller - Smash Bros. The only games we can say successfully used wii-mote it were RE4 and Metroid Prime as they actually used the aiming ability for it. Still, no actual games exist that actually uses the motion to any great benefit.
Sorry for the rant, but seeing yet another game completely miss the point of what the Wii SHOULD be just pissed me off.
If only REAL baseball were that exiting...
3 and a half minutes is long? If your attention span when watching video is less than 3 and a half minutes, why are you still reading this comment?
I invite you to explain to me exactly what a "hardcore" gamer is. In addition, please explain why I - being a person in possession of a Wii and a DS, who plays approximately an hour on the former and half an hour on the latter each and every day - is not within your arbitrary definition of "hardcore".
That's exactly the problem, and why "hardcore" is in quotes in my post.The "hardcore" audience itself is poorly defined. I have basically every Ninteo System ever made, a few of Segas, a Playstion and PS2, and an Xbox 360. But I've never spent more than five hours a week playing videogames. Am I "hardcore" because of the amount of systems I have? Or does it come down to game time?
And if it comes down to game time, then there's the stigma of the Wii and that it's for "fanboys and little kids". So, even I spent one hundred hours a week mastering every game on the Wii, there's a chance I will still be mocked and not considered "hardcore" because I'm playing on a "child's system".
Nintendo intended the Wii to target the "casual gamer" demographic, which implies we have at least two demographics, the other being hardcore. One can infer that "casual" is someone who will play a few minutes here or there, when they feel like it. However, that still leaves the "hardcore" demographic horribly ill-defined.
So, in short, I've never found two people who agree 100% on what a "hardcore" gamer is. I was using the comment to relate to the implied branding of the Wii as a fanboy or children's system.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
I think it's more accurate to say the Wii is not a machine exclusively for hardcore gamers. After all, a gamer is hardly hardcore if he avoids the Wii.
Incidentally, the Wii game I've enjoyed the most, and put the most hours into, is Fire Emblem... which does not use the Wiimote at all. Other hardcore suggestions: Metroid, of course, and No More Heroes. Resident Evil 4 was terrific, an example of a game transformed from Very Good to Great by the addition of the Wiimote.
Fire Emblem: So difficult it will sterilize you.
I thought I was the only one who played it on easy. Good to find another person out there that also does.
Hardcore gamers always start new games in "hard" mode - easy is for lamers and n00bs.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
meta review
trailer
Awesome story (pretty graphic language), but VERY annoyingly repetitive game play. More so than the typically annoyingly repetitive game play.
Haha, someone has to mention that game in this topic. I beat the game on normal (taking me like 70 hours, because I didn't want to lose any characters) and then I tried hard. God, was it difficult. I gave up in frustration.
seeing lots of use lately.
My Nintendo Wii has been gathering dust for months now.
You've been modded funny, but I think you're probably nearest the truth.
"Casual" vs. "Hardcore" has nothing to do with the time spent. People will play "casual" games for hours and hours. Since it's one of the few games I've downloaded on my phone I've probably racked up 20+ hours of Zuma.
I don't think it's a matter of defining the audience, but the games themselves. Casual gamers play casual games, hardcore gamers play hardcore games. Now, defining the difference can be difficult. Certainly traditional FPSs, RPGs, and RTSs are, or can be, "hardcore". They are games that traditional "gamerz" play. Most "puzzle" games, like Zuma, Lumines, and Bejewelled are certainly casual. Most flash games, and other free internet games are casual. PopTop games like Diner Dash and Virtual Villagers are casual. There's also some kind of inbetween though. What do you do with Puzzle Quest? I don't consider traditional adventure games to be casual, but they are close. They certainly are not hardcore, right? What the hell am I talking about, BTW? This is obviously a pointless semantic argument....
Clovis
^ Clovis, look! It's that guy you are!
If you read this and though "that's stupid" then you are not a hardcore gamer.
It's Wii strokin' time!
That's exactly the problem, and why "hardcore" is in quotes in my post.
Ah, OK, so we're kind of on the same page then.
The "hardcore" audience itself is poorly defined. I have basically every Ninteo System ever made, a few of Segas, a Playstion and PS2, and an Xbox 360. But I've never spent more than five hours a week playing videogames. Am I "hardcore" because of the amount of systems I have? Or does it come down to game time?
I'd go one step further and ask whether it even needs to be defined in the first place. As for costs - does that define being hardcore? As you say, if you spend a fortune but don't play much or aren't very good at your games, is that hardcore? Or how about if you spend a lot, but it's a tiny amount of your disposable income? Surely that's not as hardcore as spending less, but it being a greater percentage of your money.
And if it comes down to game time, then there's the stigma of the Wii and that it's for "fanboys and little kids". So, even I spent one hundred hours a week mastering every game on the Wii, there's a chance I will still be mocked and not considered "hardcore" because I'm playing on a "child's system".
Indeed. You could be ridiculed for playing easy, childish games or whatever. On the other hand, I'd say anyone who finishes all of Mario Galaxy (all 120 stars, twice, plus the bonus star) is incredibly hardcore. Some people think I'm hardcore because I've got star ratings on all courses on Mario Kart. I'd also say it's pretty hardcore to finish a long game like Zelda.
Nintendo intended the Wii to target the "casual gamer" demographic, which implies we have at least two demographics, the other being hardcore. One can infer that "casual" is someone who will play a few minutes here or there, when they feel like it. However, that still leaves the "hardcore" demographic horribly ill-defined.
I think it would be fairer to say that Nintendo intended to cater to a broader audience, which could include both the hardcore and the n00bs. As we've both hinted at, if you can be excellent at a challenging game, that's pretty hardcore regardless of the console.
So, in short, I've never found two people who agree 100% on what a "hardcore" gamer is. I was using the comment to relate to the implied branding of the Wii as a fanboy or children's system.
Yeah, that makes sense. I've had plenty of arguments about what exactly it means to be a "hardcore" gamer. In my experience, people seem to want to define it at someone who plays graphically high end FPS games on a very expensive PC or a 360/PS3. I'm sure there are hardcore players out there, but I don't think the genre of game or the platform is what defines it. I'd like to think that being hardcore means playing a lot of games, and probably being pretty good at them. Hell, you could be hardcore at Tetris on the Gameboy if you were really good at it.
You and Von Helmet make good arguments, and I tend to agree with you, but my personal belief has always been that hardcore gamers aren't defined by how good they are, or specifically by what games they play, or how much they play, but how seriously they take their games.
i think Smash bros is an example of a game that can be casual, or hardcore, depending on how you play it, in general a good acid test is whether or not you consider practicing your moves, and working to become a more proficient gamer to be worth your time, if you do, your probably what most people would consider hardcore, if you just play for kicks then your probably casual, or somewhere in between.
Referring to the wii specifically, id say the only games that are "Casual" are those that don't promote or reward skill, such as racing games with rubber band AI, or FPS's that automatically handicap players in the lead
Also, I'd differentiate between casual gamers and n00bs, since it seams like the people we think of as n00bs are usually only the hardcore gamers without the skills. I don't think casual gamers really care enough about their abilities to classify each other.
Thank God! Man, I'd shoot myself... ;)