Slashdot Mirror
Does the Wii Provide A "Watered-Down" Game Experience?
CNet is running a story inspired by comments from Ubisoft's Ben Mattes about how the Wii affects game development. When asked why there was no Wii version of Prince of Persia, Mattes said, "The reality is that from a technical standpoint, the Wii cannot do what we wanted the game to do. The AI of Elika was highly advanced and required a lot of processing power; the world size and dynamic loading, the draw distance, the number of polygons in the characters... If we had done a Wii version, it would have been toned down, probably linear; it wouldn't have been an open-world game, and so it would have been a very different experience." The article goes on to look at a number of Wii games that are stripped-down versions of their Xbox 360 or PS3 counterparts. Of course, part of the Wii's drawing power is that it's much simpler than the other systems, and has brought casual gaming to millions more people than it would have otherwise. The question remains, as Kotaku points out, whether the Wii's audience will persist after the other systems match its casual-gaming capabilities.
Well the worst thing about his complaints is, the new Prince of Persia wasn't a good a very good game. Elika's AI may have been complicated, but it wasn't reflected in the end-product by her doing anything very cool. The "open-world" concept of the game was pretty weak-- getting from point A to point B was linear, but you were just given the option of whether you wanted to go from point A to point B, or from point A to point C.
Prince of Persia: Sands of Time was a better game, and it was linear. The girl sidekick from that game was just as good as Elika. It didn't require particularly high-end hardware.
The Jak and Daxter games on the PS2 used dynamic loading, and the PS2 hardware was clearly inferior to the Wii in every respect.
And check out the reviews of GTA Chinatown Wars for DS, Rockstar clearly put the effort in to think about what the DS could do best, and build the game around that.
Then again, the Prince of Persia team have a history of crappy ports. Their last Wii title was a horrible port with a frame rate that dropped through the floor during the final battle, even though it was derived from the PS2 game.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
The Wii attach rate is abysmal and for real gamers games it's even worse. Yeah, 20 million people bought a Wii, but about 15 million of them just played Wii sports then forgot about it.
The Wii market might be much larger in sheer numbers, but the expected sales for a game like PoP is probably smaller.
Sigs are awesome huh?
Your frame of reference is obviously that of a "normal video game player." You are not the Wii's target market, and thus you feel understandably disenfranchised. I just cannot manage to see how appealing to the "mainstream market" ie normal, everyday people, reflects a failure in development. I also think that you drastically underestimate the number of shitty games for the PS2. There were close to 2500 games made for that console, and if you think the average quality was that great, then you have never been in a gamestop bargain bin.
In writing this comment, I am aware of the fact that there are not as many top-quality wii games as I would have hoped or expected at this stage of development. However, I think that the games designed specifically for the wii are fantastic, and I blame the deficit partially on poor ports and the cost barriers involved when companies decide to develop a title. After all, if you were a developer, would it appear to be more cost effective to program for joysticks and buttons than a novel motion-capture interface? Of course, because the title can be sold to PS3 and Xbox and PC users alike, and your staff likely has more experience in programing for these interfaces.
So... a reason for NOT liking the Wii would be "my kids like the Wii"? Is it just me, or is that type of reasoning completely insane?
Errrr, no. I never actually even said I didn't like the Wii. I said it is not an activity I would pursue on my own. I actually like play-doh and coloring with my kids. I just wouldn't spend $250 plus a zillion dollars for peripherals on a toddler's toy.
My statement was a response to the original poster, whose point was something along the lines of "The Wii is so great it is simple enough for toddlers." My point was "Things that are simple enough for toddlers generally don't appeal to me on their own. That the Wii is simple is no more a plus than for play-doh or coloring books."