Aussie Nintendo Wii Launch: Dec 7 / $399 AUS (OFFICIAL)

Cletus · Post by **Cletus** » 20 Sep 2006 02:01 am

The last of the great original Nintendo games were made for the N64.

Since then their console games have been nothing to write home about...unless your a Zelda fan I suppose.

I'd be more inclined to think that Nintendo are aiming for the gay market this time around.They've almost given up on the kiddy market knowing full well that Zelda games only appeal to the bicurious and straight out homosexuals.

It's triple J all over again.It's as if being a manly man type bloke is criminal these days.

EDIT: I've been posting replies just trying to upset someone here for weeks and nothing.If this comment doesn't piss someone off I give up.

Rocco · Post by **Rocco** » 20 Sep 2006 03:29 am

I know that was simply an attempted bait, but acting like an attention whore doesn’t excuse being a fucking dimwit, considering that was indeed a deliberate personal attack against me.

Eat shit!

Vince · Post by **Vince** » 20 Sep 2006 05:43 am

I actually liked my Gamecube... It didn't have the higher number quality of games like the PS2 did, but i thought it did ok for a discarded system. IMO!

Candy Arse · Post by **Candy Arse** » 20 Sep 2006 06:27 am

Cletus wrote:I'd be more inclined to think that Nintendo are aiming for the gay market this time around.They've almost given up on the kiddy market knowing full well that Zelda games only appeal to the bicurious and straight out homosexuals.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 09:20 am

We need DJ Fusion in here to tell selfish to stop being such a whiner because he's poor.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 10:01 am

Interesting article:

http://lukems.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... Id=5519593

On the 1UP Yours Podcast, John Davison said that the Nintendo Wii wasn't a console for the hardcore -- it wasn't a console for us (us meaning those of us on the show) -- it's a console for the mass market. And in its mass market appeal it should be reaching out to mainstream consumers -- but it's not right now.

The appeal of Wii Sports doesn't extend too far beyond drinking games at a friends' house, and like I wrote in my preview of Marvel: Ultimate Alliance some of these Wii titles use hackneyed control schemes that don't utilize the unique functionality that the Wii affords it. Instead, games for the Wii (launch games certainly, who is to say what will happen going forward) will end up forcing the controls rather than develop for the controls. Developing games in that fashion will abort the Wii.

What kinds of games should be made for Nintendo's Wii? In addition to Nintendo's stable of successful first party franchises, Nintendo needs to find a way to innovate on the controller. I certainly would've leveled similar criticisms at the DS when it came out, but the DS itself even has the luxury of not using the Stylus and touch screen that profoundly. The DS's success is due to Nintendo's consistent dominance in the handheld sphere, not because of its inclusion of the touch screen. New Super Mario Bros. isn't successful because it has two screens -- it's successful because it's a new Mario game. It's not innovative, it doesn't make you say "wow" at its unique incorporation of the DS's added functionality -- it's a new Mario game (and one that is wildly inferior to Super Mario Bros. 3 or Super Mario World.

Matt 'One Take' Leone blogged about his love affair with Super Mario Galaxy and perhaps the best thing he's said to me about the game was that "it feels like the game was built to be played on the Wii." The much-anticipated Legend of Zelda: The Twilight Princess was not -- it was built as a GameCube game and revised to push Nintendo's hardware.

How should Nintendo solve the design problems that plague games like Big Brain Academy, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, Madden? They need to rethink the model and they need to rethink the model in the next six months. After the initial wave of early adopters -- Nintendo must expand outside of its base. The same fans will buy a Nintendo Wii that bought the GameCube for Nintendo's core franchises will buy it for the same franchises -- but they aren't going to expand unless things change.

Rich Vorodi, a developer for Nintendo Software Technology (NST) described the Wii interface to me far better than its been discussed since. This was at Nintendo's Game Summit last November. To paraphrase Vorodi, he said that developers needed to think of the Wii control scheme as an extension the gamer's hand in a space. That world should be available to your hand, it should be yours to interact with -- that is what the Wii should strive for.

A friend of mine named Ted, a gamer and cynic like myself, described a series of games that could be successful on the Wii.. Without giving away his ideas entirely, imagine a game where the gameplay is repairing cars. The UI is basically under the hood of a car and on the right side of the screen are a variety of tools that you can point to and grab -- a wrench, a hammer, whatever (I don't repair cars). Then with the appropriate tool you'll use the Wii-mote to twist off sparkplugs, lift up parts, poke around inside, look in closely at the parts and try and diagnose what's wrong with the car. Extend this gameplay to other seemingly rudimentary and mundane tasks -- it might sound like work, but people sit around and slobber all over Phoenix Wright and that game is little more than a 30-hour Encyclopedia Brown book without a back section to flip to and see the ending.

How will the Wii end up? Launch software isn't ever a good barometer of a console's success, but at the same time -- did Nintendo's DS sell well because it has a 'touch screen' (here's a clue: No) or because it was a Nintendo handheld and they've been dominating that space for years?

They certainly don't have that track record in the home console space of late, do they?

Seraph · Post by **Seraph** » 20 Sep 2006 10:09 am

Interesting article? Well, I suppose it's about as interesting as an article can get when it's nothing more than opinionated rubbish...

lestat · Post by **lestat** » 20 Sep 2006 10:15 am

Seraph wrote:If it was an HD monster we'd just have lestat telling us there are two next gen consoles that are lying to us and that we don't need 1080p anyway, because you can just compress.

Nintendo aren't masters of FUD and lies like sony are.

If nintendo announced 1080p gaming we most likely would be seeing 1080p games standard. Nintendo unlike sony keep it real.

I'm still waiting for my 1teraflop cell chip that was promised.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 10:20 am

Seraph wrote:Interesting article? Well, I suppose it's about as interesting as an article can get when it's nothing more than opinionated rubbish...

Opinionated rubbish? Funny, I find that an apt description of almost all your posts. This article, however, was interesting and raised some very good points.

lestat, Nintendo lie very often as well, they're masters of it - Project Reality anyone? They delay stuff MUCH more often than Sony does too.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 10:26 am

And here's another good article I just read on 1up, linked to in that blog post above:

http://bigolaf.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... Id=5380373

Mario Galaxy: the best thing going on Wii

Finally.

At E3 this year, Super Mario Galaxy was the single game I wanted to play most. It's also the one I didn't get to play at all. Chalk it up to leaving it for my "free time" on the last day of the show and then waving goodbye to that time when it was supposed to come around.

Then I went to Leipzig, hoping to get to play it there -- wasn't there.

Then came Nintendo's press event in New York today, and once again I left the game (same demo that was at E3) for the end of the day, as I had to get all my write-ups and real work in before I'd let myself mess around with it. The press event was scheduled to go until 4:00, so at 3:00 I had to check out Red Steel as the last game on my list to cover for the day, and I started to get a bit antsy when the build kept freezing while the guy in front of me was playing and my turn kept getting pushed back a few minutes at a time. I kept checking my cell phone clock -- 3:10, 3:15, 3:25. I finally got to jump on and try Red Steel's sword fighting for 15 minutes or so, then made a mad dash over to Mario.

3:40 -- I got to the Galaxy kiosk right as someone else was giving up the controller. It felt meant to be.

I spent the remainder of the event stuck to that machine, simply getting a feel for the controls and taking as many of the different paths through the demo as I could find, before getting kicked off the machine as Nintendo was shutting the event down.

The floating star you control with the Wii Remote? Awesome -- and a perfect way to make use of the pointer without resorting to a clumsy aiming system, with a loose enough target zone that you can hit things if it feels like you are close to them even if you are a few pixels off. The whole idea of swirling it on a spinning star to send Mario flying? Feels incredible, with the perfect amount of rumble and feedback as you toss him from planet to planet. The charm of it all? Undeniable.

This is the only Wii game I have played so far where it didn't ever feel like a struggle or require awkward movements to get the game to do what I wanted -- I just came across an objective and was able to blast through it, feeling like a total badass. The game doesn't give off the vibe that the developers are trying to shoehorn traditional game mechanics into the Wii controller. Galaxy is doing something that could not be done nearly as effectively on a traditional controller, which is the opposite of what we're seeing from a lot of Wii games.

The weird thing about all this is, looking back I don't really know why I built the game up so much in my head prior to trying it out, as it's the execution that makes the game shine even moreso than the ideas. Maybe it's just that I've been looking for a Wii game that can sell me on the system. And I'm happy to say that my half hour with the demo has confirmed this is that game.

Release this demo as a system pack-in, Nintendo. It's far better than Wii Sports, and it will speak to the type of players that are going to buy your system on day one. It shows what real games on this system can be, which is something you could use desperately right now.

Mario Galaxy is one of the major reasons I haven't cancelled my preorder yet.

Seraph · Post by **Seraph** » 20 Sep 2006 10:27 am

Oh, an "I know you are but what am I" post. How clever.

The appeal of Wii Sports doesn't extend too much beyond drinking games a t afriend's house, Mario on DS being "wildly inferior" to the SMB3/4, talking up a "virtual mechanic" idea and not even acknowledging that games like that already do exist by third parties (Trauma Centre 2 being a launch title springs to mind...). It's actually worse than opinionated, it's ill-informed.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 20 Sep 2006 10:27 am

Rocco's post up there has some good points. Ive said as much before in different ways though - Gamecube 2 would have most likely failed as well. And, as nice as it would have been to have better graphics, a Gamecube 2 would have cost ~$700 (say) and done EXACTLY the same graphics and effects as a PS3 and 360.

The only distinguishing features between all 3 consoles would be the first party exclusives and the online service. Now, think of yourself as a primarily XBox 360 owner - is it worth another $1700 just to be able to play MGS4 and Mario? When most other games (read 90%) are available on 360 as it is?

With price and graphics aside, I'm glad that there is actually a distinction between Wii and the other systems - the distinction being control.

Each of the 3 consoles has strengths. 360 has XBL and independant games on arcade, PS3 has BluRay and probably graphics sewn up, and Wii has the new control scheme and the best retro library.

So long as games are made to take advantage of the Wiimote, and not shoe-horned into it to make a quick buck (re: most ports) then Wii should be able to deliver some really refreshing gameplay thats a good alternative to the direction the other 2 consoles are headed.

Kabal · Post by **Kabal** » 20 Sep 2006 10:29 am

selfish wrote:i'm like unfunk, sd fo life
well, until i get a new tv falls off the back of a truck in my general direction
thousands of dollars on a tv = wasted (imho)

I dunno how anyone can be a 'hardcore' gamer without some kind of HD display and 5.1 system going. That shit is just essential IMO, but maybe I'm just a graphics whore.

Its like whenever you see those pictures on the internet of some guy with some outragously awesome video game collection in a room and then they have some shit box tv that would probably make my eyes bleed just looking at it.

That might just be me, though.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 20 Sep 2006 10:33 am

mech: did you ever read the old USA mag "Next Gen" - it's the sister mag of Edge, now defunct, and it shared a lot of content with it. Anyway, your previous 1up post reminded me of one of the old NextGen articles about games and characters.

Comparing this to the garage simulator you mention, they asked "Why are there no games where you play as a hotshot lawyer trying to save an innocent man from death row, or a heart surgeon trying to save someone's life." This was in about 1997, and whilst the analogy may be considered prophetic in terms of two DS games, it's certainly not vindicated yet because those two games are still mostly linear. The point still stands though - these are examples of types of games and characters that are worth exploring, and the Wii, more than any console, is in the unique position with the Wiimote where it could make inroads into new genres or roles that arent involving spacemarines, criminals or warriors.

lestat · Post by **lestat** » 20 Sep 2006 10:36 am

I think it still would of been nice for the wii to support hd resolutions. Even if the graphics details/effects wasn't up there with ps3/360 just having the extra clarity of 720p or greater would of be real nice to have.

480p now to me for games looks quite fugly after you get used to 720p. Even xbox1 games that ran at 720p looked real nice.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 10:44 am

Seraph wrote:Oh, an "I know you are but what am I" post. How clever.

The appeal of Wii Sports doesn't extend too much beyond drinking games a t afriend's house, Mario on DS being "wildly inferior" to the SMB3/4, talking up a "virtual mechanic" idea and not even acknowledging that games like that already do exist by third parties (Trauma Centre 2 being a launch title springs to mind...). It's actually worse than opinionated, it's ill-informed.

Another smarmy post from you. How clever.

And so on and so forth...

I think he's right about Wii sports, it just isn't a deep game, it's MEANT to be a party game. He's also right (IMO) about Mario.

And boo hoo he doesn't mention one whole game which does something kind of similar to what he's talking about there. So what? Can you name any other titles? Does it somehow negate his point?

And lestat's right, the Wii should at least support 720p, it hardly requires much processing power to do so, wonder if it's got any support at all for that built in?

Seraph · Post by **Seraph** » 20 Sep 2006 10:44 am

Nah, it's not you, Kabal. Or at least, it's not just you. There are many people who fall into that cateogry of "must have biggest and best in audio and video". But where some games really depend upon, or take advantage of, the big sound and vision experience, others don't. I mean, in selfish's case, Nintendo has yet to give us a home console that supports 5.1 or 16:9, so the 50" plasma and HT setup isn't going to make the experience much better.

Then there's the perceived value factor. Just as some people don't think Bluray is worth a grand, or a turbo gamecube is worth 400, some people don't think a bigger, clearer screen is worth 5000 bucks, or 2000 bucks, or even 800.

My sound setup is just stereo, and I often find myself looking at 5.1 setups in stores wondering "why the hell haven't I bought this already?" But then I remember that the 500 bucks I could spend on better sound for my current games, I could spend on buying 8-10 new games.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 20 Sep 2006 10:47 am

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;? ... v&id=13187

Mario Galaxy doesnt really need HD. Still looks shit-hot

Seraph · Post by **Seraph** » 20 Sep 2006 10:58 am

Ah, so "interesting article" actually means "I agree with this person". Now it makes a lot more sense.

And yes, the fact that he doesn't mention the game does negate his point. He either doesn't know the game exists - which shows that he's got no knowledge to back up his claim of there being no appropriate titles for the controller - or he knows about it but isn't acknowledging it, because of the want to slant his article away from fact and towards opinion.

If Trauma Centre is the only game, he should be saying something like "for a system that is trying to sell us on a new control system and way of playing games, it's got precious little to offer us. There are too many Marvel Ultimate Alliances and not enough Trauma Centres."

GreyWizzard · Post by **GreyWizzard** » 20 Sep 2006 11:10 am

That game is going to cause peopel to hurl. The whole no real up or down to the game. Just watching the spider world vid made me wanna be sick.

It looks very nice indeed. But this might be a problem. We are going to get some shit hot looking first party titles, and some bog average looking 3rd party titles. Then we have to contend with dev's doing lazy ports to the new control method.

I guess only time will tell with what we are going to get.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 11:18 am

Seraph wrote:Ah, so "interesting article" actually means "I agree with this person". Now it makes a lot more sense.

No it doesn't. It was interesting because he raised some good points, whether you agree with him or not.

And yes, the fact that he doesn't mention the game does negate his point. He either doesn't know the game exists - which shows that he's got no knowledge to back up his claim of there being no appropriate titles for the controller - or he knows about it but isn't acknowledging it, because of the want to slant his article away from fact and towards opinion.

No it doesn't. He's right, people need to rethink the controls.

If Trauma Centre is the only game, he should be saying something like "for a system that is trying to sell us on a new control system and way of playing games, it's got precious little to offer us. There are too many Marvel Ultimate Alliances and not enough Trauma Centres."

Why is it so important that he mentions Trauma Centre? The fact remains that too many games are trying to ram in controls on a port or a game type ill-suited to the Wii's control scheme, which is his point - and that developers need to "think of the Wii control scheme as an extension the gamer's hand in a space. That world should be available to your hand, it should be yours to interact with -- that is what the Wii should strive for." Are you saying that argument is negated just because he didn't mention Trauma Centre? What kind of fanboy logic is this?

Seraph · Post by **Seraph** » 20 Sep 2006 11:35 am

Oh my, he used the f-word.

I was expecting a balanced point of view from the article. God knows why, given that it was about the Wii and you were posting it.

But anyway, as I said before, twice now?... if you want to pay out on something doing something wrong you should at the least acknowledge the things that are done right, so you show that you have any idea what you're talking about.

If, for example, one wanted to criticise the Gamecube's online model, it would be foolish not to point out that there were only two online games released in The West, and that they weren't made by Nintendo. It demonstrates to the reader that the author has done his research, and that he's approaching the topic with an unbiased point of view.

Similarly, in this situation, he'd have done a better job of getting a point across if he'd shown that he has any idea what he's talking about. How many games are there out there that use it effectively? I only know of a handful. The author of that article, it would seem, knows none. Now, maybe there are only 3 games that support it, maybe there are 50. I have no idea. But I can't take the author's word for it, because he can't even name 1 that is known. And it's especially unconvincing, given that if you replace "mechanic" with "surgeon" and "hood" with "patient", he described Trauma Centre's exact gameplay. It's not like it would've been hard just to say, as mentioned before "Trauma Centre is the exception, when it should be the rule". You want to write an authoritave article on something, the first thing you need to do is research, the second thing you need to do is show people you've done it.

Pat · Post by **Pat** » 20 Sep 2006 11:41 am

The problem is, mech, you quote 1up. Further, seraph is correct. His ignorance of Trauma Centre doing EXACTLY what he described as a mechanic game doesnt help his credibility.

GreyWizzard · Post by **GreyWizzard** » 20 Sep 2006 11:47 am

From what I have seen so far, Mario Galaxy, Mario Strikers and Excite Truck are probably the best looking games.

But I am still thinking of getting Elebits on launch. That game really looks fun and strange

I think four player Elebit hunting will go off.

mech · Post by **mech** » 20 Sep 2006 11:50 am

I've had people say IGN is shit, that 1up is shit, that Joystiq is shit, SO WHICH FUCKING SITES AREN'T SHIT THEN?

I get most of my videogame info from 1up, Joystiq, Shacknews and Edge magazine, and I find them all to be pretty good really. Even IGN can be alright, though it used to be a lot better in the late 90s, early 2000s.

Similarly, in this situation, he'd have done a better job of getting a point across if he'd shown that he has any idea what he's talking about. How many games are there out there that use it effectively? I only know of a handful. The author of that article, it would seem, knows none.

He has shown he has any idea of what he's talking about.

And he mentions Mario Galaxy as being a title that controls great.

It's not even meant to be an authoritive article per se, it was just a blog post, but he made good and interesting points, and if you think they're all negated simply by not mentioning Trauma Centre, you're crazy. At least try to point out where he went wrong rather than saying "he's ill-informed" and harping on about this Trauma Centre stuff. I don't get what your beef is - he's not saying Wii is going to fail, he's saying it will need a greater proportion of games designed around the controller, rather than designed first and changed to fit the controller (hello Zelda). I think that's a pretty fair comment to make. It's not like he's saying that's not going to happen either.

Edit: Pat, he's saying which games would be successful on the Wii, NOT THAT SUCH GAMES DON'T EXIST.