Wii Sports to include tennis, baseball, golf, bowling, and boxing
by Blake Snow 
{ Sep 14th 2006 at 1:15PM }
Wii Sports will be bundled free come November 19 when Wii launches for $250 stateside. That much we know. But how many mini-sports games will be included in the package title? While sources close to EGM (Oct issue, page 74) suggested that the game "is going to sport over 30 different games" and USA Today name dropped a basketball game (typo?), the official Wii Sports fact sheet only mentions tennis, baseball, golf, bowling, and boxing.From the release: "Wii Sports offers five distinct sports experiences, each using the Wii Remote to provide a natural, intuitive and realistic feel. Players can use their own Mii caricatures in the game and play them against their friends' Miis for a more personalized experience. As players improve, their Miis' skill levels will increase, so that they can see exactly how much better they've become."
You guys will be the first to see my Lego-looking Mii mug shot this November.
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 3)
flyNN @ Sep 14th 2006 2:19PM
I like... Go Carts!
JAyY @ Sep 14th 2006 2:20PM
@41 Gamecube was the 1st to launch without a Mario game instead they launched with Luigui's Mansion
James Chen @ Sep 14th 2006 2:20PM
#23 Jerm says: "Good game play, that looks good. If you just want good game play, then let's just release TechoBowl over and over again, with no graphical update. How about playing Ms Pac-Man for the next 5 years. Anyone that says that graphics aren't important to gaming it only fan-boy ranting."
Actually, your complaint is exactly the type of thinking that the Wii is fighting against. The concept of "graphics don't matter" isn't a cry against graphics. It's a cry FOR innovation. What you are implying is that if they keep releasing Ms. Pac-Man with a graphical boost every year that we would buy it and be happy. And guess what: you're right. Look at the Madden games. Same game every year, slight upgrades, sells like hotcakes.
The point of "graphics don't matter" is that we are okay with playing games that don't look amazing so long as they provide NEW innovation and NEW gameplay that we haven't experienced before, not that we are happy with playing Tecmo Bowl forever. Nothing announced for 360 and PS3 have quite the gameplay "shake-up" that anything on the Wii has so far. Everything is just a better version of what you've already played. I admit I'm still not sold on the Wii just yet, and I'm still debating whether waving a remote control around will be fun at all, but at least they are trying something different. It's hard to knock that.
nick @ Sep 14th 2006 2:21PM
"Graphics dont matter: fine, but:
why are they charging 2.5 times as much as GameCube for GameCube 1.1 graphics + Wiimote?
why not sell the Wiimote as a special controller for GC; save people from buying the GC again."
If you don't get, then there's nothing we can do to help. Sorry.
Jeff @ Sep 14th 2006 2:22PM
"What I am trying to figure out is how the hell does these game simulate real bowling, tennis if there is no physics engine?"
The game is obviously just all the mini-games from Super Monkey Ball with a different control scheme. Seriously. SMB didn't have a physics engine either, really, and none of the games felt "realistic", but they were fun enough for a while. (Not all equally, but I imagine that will be true of this collection too.)
"I want to know why the graphics on this game even matter to anybody? You're swinging a stick at a ball."
Then we may as well all still be playing Pong. Modern tennis games don't do a whole lot more than Pong did, unless they have physics engines, which Wii Sports supposedly doesn't.
I mean there is an argument that says that we already pretty much have all the video games that we need, just like we probably pretty much have all the music or movies we need. You would never have time in your lifetime to play and get tired of all the good video games ever made - we're talking 30 years worth of history at this point, with dozens of games released every month, many of which would take dozens of hours of play time to exhaust. So why exactly are we buying new games at all?
Obviously, there has to be something different about these games to entice us. Nintendo is betting it's going to be a new control scheme. They're obviously betting it's *not* going to be the graphics. But there's no reason someone can't prefer better graphics to a different control scheme, and there's no reason you can't want both. For some, a new controller is just not enough to warrant a purchase of pretty much the same games we've been playing for years, just as for others, new graphics aren't enough either.
From here on out, it's going to be a constant struggle for publishers to define the reasons why we should continue to buy new games when there is already so much good content out there. Every successful game will need to work hard to differentiate itself. Graphics are just one way you can do that, but it's something Nintendo has obviously chosen not to focus on.
FimShady @ Sep 14th 2006 2:23PM
Wow...Nintendo actually convinced their fan base that graphics don't matter. Big Brother really is watching...
peshue @ Sep 14th 2006 2:25PM
So what if both controller parts cost $60, 36 are $50 and you need a charging kit to go with it. Your getting alot more for the price from the Wii remotes, it's not like you really need to buy a full set of remotes and nunchucks anyways. The whole point of having memory in the controller is so that you can bring your controller to other peoples houses and still have your lttle stickman.
Franky Digital @ Sep 14th 2006 2:25PM
@48: "And by saying 'calculate it's own physics' you mean using predetermined animations? When I think of in game physics I think of Half-Life 2."
He's talking about a proprietary physics engine that doesn't require a PhysX processor to run. Many, many games had physics engines before HL2, and none of them ever had the luxury of an independant physics processor. The only thing the PhysX processors do is alleviate the main CPU from making these calculations.
That said, there's absolutely no reason why anyone would think the WiiSports games don't have a physics engine of some sort: just by looking at the videos of the baseball and bowling, you can tell that there are calculations being done to move the ball in 3D space with a given trajectory, velocity, and so forth.
HaloBreaker @ Sep 14th 2006 2:28PM
Hi my names Steve and I'de like to admit I'm not whipped on graphics.
I don't mind them at all, unless they truley are bad. Behind in time? Fine by me. No lens flare or glow effect? K. Just make sure it's a good game. If I can't tell the difference between a character and a tree then I might be upset.
RP @ Sep 14th 2006 2:30PM
"The only one I'm skeptical of is the boxing, how do you simulate two hands when you only have one controller?"
Two remotes or one remote and a nunchuck.
SG evaNERV @ Sep 14th 2006 2:31PM
#23 Get off your graphics horse. Most of the people complaing about the graphics are forgetting the #1 thing... Nintendo wants everyone to play...not people that post on websites only.
Proof - Gameboy. My wife plays with the Nintendo DS and she is hardly a gamer. She could care less about grpahics.
Proof - Harvest Moon. Again, my wife loves the game and cares less about HDTV, and 1080i, and all that other gobbly gook I get jazzed up about.
Proof - I have showed too many people games on my Xbox 360 and get blank stares of "So what's the big deal?" The average person/gamer(not the hardcore) could care less about the graphics. If you think so...then why are Bejeweled, Myst, Super Mario, Tetris etc.. are the biggest selling games of all time? Not Oblivion...or Madden...
This whole thing reminds me of the AOL broadband deal. AOL said no to Broadband for like 3 years after DSLs and cable modems just got to market. Why? Because they knew what the critics didn't. They knew that 98% of their users were fine with regular modems. They wouldn't pay the $99 for faster speeds. Only recently has the US gotten better with broadband saturation.
Keep in mind, not many people have HDTV...and the ones that due... I highly doubt are watching them correctly. I wonder how many people actually have the component cables hooked up to their DVD players or game consoles. I talk to the techie people I know and I have to explain to them when they need to go to Component...if not HDMI.
So...again.. chill out. Nintendo is doing this because they think they know what the market wants... which is fun games to play. MS and Sony are the ones pushing people to get highly priced new TVs to play their games (Dead Rising anyone) and those TVs are still pretty expensive.
And does it freaking matter anyway? If you don't like it, don't buy it. I will because a lot of the games coming out (Zelda...drool) look fun to play.
Personally, I'll take a last generation game (God of War, Resident Evil 4, Ninja Gaiden, Shadow of the Colossus, Psychonauts etc..) than some of my X360 hi-res games that let me count the framerate by hand when too much stuff gets on the screen OBlivion and don't have much legs in the gameplay department.
Helmickster @ Sep 14th 2006 2:34PM
@47
You attach the nunchaku which is used for you second hand. (Chuck for left hand, Wii-mote for right or vice versa)
As for all of this hubbub about the price, its only $50 more than most people were thinking. If you can afford $200 you can afford $250.
I would prefer a choice between a second Wiimote/chuck or Wii-Sports but I'd rather Nintendo package the game then sell it for $50.00 if its really only a set of glorified demos.
Jon @ Sep 14th 2006 2:37PM
I really don't get reguy's comments. He says that he thinks MGS4 and Halo 3 are worth $60 but Wii games aren't worth that.
ignoring the fact that Wii games aren't going to cost that much anyway, I wil get much more enjoyment from a game like Wario Ware or Wii Sports than I would from MGS4 or Halo 3 so why should they cost less ?
Why do people think the price of a game should be directly related to how many polygons it pushes? Why do some people value graphics more than gameplay ?
Grant @ Sep 14th 2006 2:32PM
TRUTH, are you saying current-gen tennis games use "precalculated animations"? The Wii has a PPU, by the way.
OOOOPs, there is a lot more to the Wii than a Gamecube 1.1 Let's break it down:
- Online functionality
- Virtual Console (that ALONE is almost worth the price in my opinion)
- Advanced motion sensing technology (why does everyone seem to be under the impression that this tech doesn't cost anything??)
- Better than GC 1.1 graphics... seriously, check out the new videos of Necro-Nesia or SMG or Red Steel. They really do look next-gen to me. The graphical inadequacy of the Wii is being ENTIRELY overplayed.
P.S. Joystiq's comments system SUCKS SO BAD.
Jon @ Sep 14th 2006 2:37PM
Whoever said ....
"The game is obviously just all the mini-games from Super Monkey Ball with a different control scheme. Seriously. SMB didn't have a physics engine either, really, and none of the games felt "realistic", but they were fun enough for a while."
... has completely missed the point. Who needs realism when you've got FUN ?
It's also worth pointing out that the lowest technical specs of the last generation belonged to the PS2, which sold more than the GC and Xbox put together.
It's also worth mentioning that the DS has sold massively more than the PSP with less graphical power, because it's FUN!
SG evaNERV @ Sep 14th 2006 2:37PM
Is it just me or does it sound like that the people complaining about the price/features sound like the same ones that were crying before the XBox 360 launch about "It's $399 and the graphics look like the Xbox! It's a Xbox 1.5. That's too expensive...I won't buy it.")
Honestly, STFU and just buy the system(s) you want.
Or at least use some intelligence and try to analyse why Nintendo went this route with pricing and feature set.
If you would do some research...you would Nintendo ALWAYS makes money on their consoles. Yes... ALWAYS! They don't play the "lose money on the system but get it back in the games" game. This system is probably priced pretty accurately. Keep in mind, the Xbox 360 is making MS hemmorage money. I'm sure Sony is doing the same with the PS3. Price those two system so they break even, or even make a profit...and I guaratee they would be MUCH more expensive.
TRUTH @ Sep 14th 2006 2:36PM
@ Franky Digital..
Good answer, but there is a big difference between the use of proprietary physics and a physics engine. And that difference is "added realism".
phillosmaster @ Sep 14th 2006 2:37PM
31. CannedPasta, that's the best thing I've heard all day. About 1/3 my DS library is imported from Japan. Nintendo is making all kinds of steps in the right direction.
Anyone who says this is just a Gamecube in a tuxedo honestly are not looking at the big picture. The final product as a whole. The Wii channels and Wiimote alone put it on an entirely different level than the Gamecube. It's a console build around an entirely different ideology.
If you aren't excited about this then you aren't the target audience. I doubt any arguement I could make would sway your opinion. It's impossible to please all the people all of the time.
TRUTH @ Sep 14th 2006 2:43PM
@ john "... has completely missed the point. Who needs realism when you've got FUN?"
Are you crazy? Added realism increases fun buddy! Thats why Half-Life 2 won so many awards.
Jon @ Sep 14th 2006 2:47PM
@ Truth
Each to their own. I personally don't think realism increases fun and wouldn't play half life if you paid me.
I'll carry on playing the fun games that never win any awards like new super mario bros and you can carry on playing "dull real life simulator #265" :)
OOOOPs @ Sep 14th 2006 2:50PM
@jon ..
"It's also worth pointing out that the lowest technical specs of the last generation belonged to the PS2, which sold more than the GC and Xbox put together."
In this case, Wii is many, many times weaker than 360 or PS3. Its basically 6 year old technology against the bleeding edge in PS3. Theres NO contest here; Wii is the lame duck.
"It's also worth mentioning that the DS has sold massively more than the PSP with less graphical power, because it's FUN!"
ummm..this aint the handheld market. Handhelds have many more restrictions than consoles which over-ride graphics (battery life, etc). Console buyers also have different expectations of what would find acceptable on a 2.5 inch screen vs. a big screen.
Turken @ Sep 14th 2006 2:52PM
It's funny how so many gamers on the net are complaining about the pricing, pack-in choices, and/or other business decisions that Nintendo has announced today.
I think I've heard this sort of griping and naysaying and doom-for-nintendo predicting before. Where did I hear it though? Oh right... last spring when Nintendo announced the official name for the console and gave simultaneous aneurisms to thousands of fanboys and game-haters alike.
And what was the result of the name change? Those who had high hopes were dissapointed for a day or two before they finally understood the reasoning behind the decision. Now, hardly anyone complains about the name. We got over it, and got back to waiting for the system. The same thing will be true with the pricing. Sure, there is some shock and dissapointment that Nintendo didn't deliver a bundle of miracles based on our own personal hopes and wishes, but in a day or two as the news sinks in and we begin to see what we're truly getting here, everyone but the most die-hard of fanboys/haters will be satisfied.
TRUTH @ Sep 14th 2006 2:52PM
@ Jon
Hey, I know where your comming from. I would choose SSSBM and Zelda over HL2 anyday, but if those type of physics were involved into SSB is would be cool.
Jon @ Sep 14th 2006 2:56PM
@ooops
"In this case, Wii is many, many times weaker than 360 or PS3. Its basically 6 year old technology against the bleeding edge in PS3. Theres NO contest here; Wii is the lame duck."
erm.... first of all it's not 6 year old technology, stop being silly.
Secondly, you're still talking about the fact that the PS3 has better graphics and I've already said I don't care. Wii has 8 launch titles that I want to play , PS3 has 1 , That's all that matters.
SG evaNERV @ Sep 14th 2006 3:01PM
I don't understand why people attack one system. Do they feel they have to justify their "My system costs 2x or 3x more...and looks prettier... so I have to justify my spending the money?"
#71. "a 2.5 inch screen vs. a big screen." Not many people have big screen tvs. Most people don't have high speed internet either. And most people wouldn't see a different anyway besides "it is bigger"
vidGuy @ Sep 14th 2006 3:02PM
@reguy,
[broken into pieces because Joystiq won't post it]
I can defend the Wii because it's still the same system it was two days ago.
It's not five-year-old technology on the console realm. It's not a
GameCube. If the CPU is going to be efficiently reduced to the GameCube
clock speed in order to play GC games, it has to be an exact multiple of the
GC CPU, so the Wii is bound to have at least a 970MHz CPU. At nearly a Ghz, the Wii has plenty of power for a standard definition display.
SG evaNERV @ Sep 14th 2006 3:03PM
#74
"Wii has 8 launch titles that I want to play , PS3 has 1 , That's all that matters."
EXACTLY! I think the days of people buying every console for one or two locked in games is over. Almost all games go across many platforms (if not all). The consoles are just too freaking expensive. Stop and think...the Wii is going to be $250 and that's the bargain console!
What I see is a consumer buying one of the big two: PS3 or Xbox 360 and getting the Wii as the add on. Every hardcore multisystem owner I know is not going out to buy both the PS3 and Xbox 360. And that is saying a lot.
SG evaNERV @ Sep 14th 2006 3:07PM
Power doesn't matter. That's Sony/MS hyped sales forcing talking to you.
The PS2 has a 294 Mhz chip...adn 32MB memory. Yeah... THIRTY-TWO megabytes. That's like an 1/8th of my PC video card.
If you have seen a little game called God of War..you can see what staggering things that console can STILL DO! And God of War 2 even looks better.
So, when a 294 Mhz, 32 Megabyte console can generate graphics that can give my 3.7 GHZ, 2 Gigs of Ram, 256 ATI card, PC a run for its money... power doesn't mean jack.
Get over it.
reguy @ Sep 14th 2006 3:09PM
@ vidguy
you heard it here first 'so the Wii is bound to have at least a 970MHz CPU'
are you sure you havent been hitting the sauce vidguy? because last time i checked making up numbers wasnt the best way to go
vidGuy @ Sep 14th 2006 3:15PM
Sorry reguy, Joystiq refuses to confirm my post. I created a quick blog for this, please go read it here:
http://wiividguy.blogspot.com/2006/09/response-to-reguy-at-joystiq.html
TRUTH @ Sep 14th 2006 3:17PM
@ SG evaNERV
"So, when a 294 Mhz, 32 Megabyte console can generate graphics that can give my 3.7 GHZ, 2 Gigs of Ram, 256 ATI card, PC a run for its money... power doesn't mean jack.
Get over it."
A game will always run better on the system it was designed for. Based on the architecture.
Case @ Sep 14th 2006 3:30PM
Davidv, #7:
"the North American Wii is the exact same package but WITH Wii Sports and $35 more expensive, that doesn't make it 'free' anymore."
You hit the nail on the head. Great post.
#49:
"why are they charging 2.5 times as much as GameCube for GameCube 1.1 graphics + Wiimote?".
I think a lot of people will be surprised at the graphics the Wii can produce, especially in a couple years. This is more of a Gamecube 2.0.
Also, the package comes with built-in wifi, the needed sensor bar, lots of new ports, and built in flash memory. Whether you want it or not, you also pay for news and weather, a little photo program, and Wii Sports.
Basically what I'm saying is that while the price isn't all that good, it is at least acceptable.
vidGuy @ Sep 14th 2006 3:32PM
reguy, actually, I think the hardware is wholely irrelevant. If the games provide a fun experience that can't be had on current systems, then I see no reason to complain. I DO think the CPU will be between 700MHz and 1GHz and the GPU will be between 400MHz and 600MHz.
Caoz @ Sep 14th 2006 3:38PM
Sadly to say. It seems that the rest of the Wii Sports games will be sold for wii bucks. So they may be 30 of them, but only 5 will be included with the console. VC pricing seems to indicate they will milk our money like that.
Logan @ Sep 14th 2006 3:54PM
Let a programmer make sense of this whole "the CEO of Gearbox called it "a supercharged Gamecube" thing...
Both the PS3 and the 360 are multi-core processing machines. PS2 and Xbox were not. As soon as you want a single program to benefit from multiple processors, you have to program using a method called "multi-threading." As soon as you do that, you have to manage several digital "trains of thought" accessing the same memory space. If you're not exceedingly careful, they start tripping over each other sporadically and the program is unstable.
Wii, on the other hand was called a "super-charged GameCube" because its architechure is *very* similar to a GameCube, it just has a more power and memory. It avoids the problem of multithreading at the cost of more processing power, and is therefore *much easier to develop for*, especially if the team is already familiar with GameCube.
What the Gearbox Head Honcho is saying is that the Wii is easier to adapt to and develop for. He's not saying it's slow.
gman @ Sep 14th 2006 3:58PM
"85. Sadly to say. It seems that the rest of the Wii Sports games will be sold for wii bucks. So they may be 30 of them, but only 5 will be included with the console. VC pricing seems to indicate they will milk our money like that."
and episodic content is to thank for that...whether we like it or not, it's the wave of the future...
And anyone that has seen the trailer for SSB Brawl knows that the wii will throw out some pretty intense SD graphics
TRUTH @ Sep 14th 2006 4:00PM
(PROGRAMMERS NOT ALLOWED)
*In a western accent*
We don't take kindly to you folks around here!
reguy @ Sep 14th 2006 4:12PM
good post/blog vidguy. im not sure i agree with you, big shock huh =)
but you're right the wii didnt fail. lets do an over under - 50 miliion wiis sold worldwide in its lifetime
I say under, what about you?
Saefer @ Sep 14th 2006 4:29PM
What is wrong with some of you. People are complaining about the price. I dont see anybody complaining about PS3 price, and its more then twice as much. Who gives a crap if has BLU-RAY, and who gives a crap if the VIDEO CARD is the best thing ever. Since when has graphics ever been a nescesity to a game. Who gives a crap if they dont look like a perfect portrait from DaVinci. When I play a game I dont go "God this game is so fun, BUT THESE DAMN GRAPHICS MAKE ME SO ANGRY I WILL NEVER PLAY IT AGAIN." I like Wii cause of the unique controller (plus its nintendo). Playstation controller is the lamest thing ever cause after they have gotten crappier over the years. I used to like them, because of the rumble feature, now it lost that, so it sucks. So dont critize the Wii if Playstation is worse in almost every aspect.
potato @ Sep 14th 2006 4:32PM
AAAAAAAAH my eyes!!!
vidGuy @ Sep 14th 2006 4:42PM
reguy, thanks for being civil while you disagree. I agree that not all of today's new is good for fans, but I haven't heard anything that turns me off to the console as a whole.
I'd say maybe under 50 by a few mil, but this thing is still going to make a killing.
JBA @ Sep 14th 2006 4:42PM
I think some people are missing the point of Wii Sports. It is in no way a representation of the full graphical power of the ATI GPU. The game is meant to be played with others in short bursts; it will also get newcomers familiar with the remote and how it works so they can graduate to other games.
People really need to stop beating the already dead graphical horse. Yes, we all know the Wii will not output in HD or as powerful as a 360, but on a standard TV or EDTV there shouldn't be too much of a difference.
If you want a "true" HD experience, get a PC, which has had this "HD" stuff for many years already. I really don't understand why some people act like they need everything to be in HD nowadays; HDTV has only been available to the masses for a short time, this is the first generation of consoles in the HDTV era, and suddenly people need games in HD? Wii games will be widescreen and progressive scan, I say that is good for this generation.
no @ Sep 14th 2006 5:17PM
"a new controller is just not enough to warrant a purchase of pretty much the same games we've been playing for years"
you have been playing wii sports from years? lucky bastard you must that magic remote control from the future.
hitmanfq @ Sep 14th 2006 5:28PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPLTE7wXt9U&eurl=
Wii boxing sweet!!!!
Link @ Sep 14th 2006 6:00PM
I can't wait for Zelda - The best game ever made - hands down - beat that Pee p 2 and 3 and xbox -
Chris @ Sep 14th 2006 6:24PM
The fact that I create my own avitars to play in Wii sports makes this game 100% more apealing. The graphics aren't even bad. They are smooth and colorful. When I think of bad graphics I think of ugly textures, bad clipping, poor framereate.
you are the kind of people who say Wind Waker has bad graphics, when in fact it's superrior to most games out there, even on 360.
Graphics do not equal art style.
phx @ Sep 14th 2006 6:42PM
The old screens of wii tennis looked a lot worse than the japanese wii.com promotional videos.
Yamen @ Sep 14th 2006 6:44PM
Alright, here we go:
First off, it's been pointed out several times, but the Wii games are NOT $60 ($59.99), they are $50 ($49.99). Just needs to keep being said.
Next, TRUTH, I really can't help but feel that you have no idea what a physics engine actually is. I used to be a game developer, and all of my roomates still are, so I have a good background to try to explain this to you (and anyone curious). An "engine" in game design (or other applications) is very simply the part of the code that handles a certain part of the game's calculations/rendering/data management etc. A "physics engine" simply simulates physics for specified objects ACCORDING TO THE RULES THE PROGRAMMER IMPLEMENTS. Let me give you a few examples of physics engines to show the diversity of what a physics engine can be.
Physics Engine #1: Half-Life 2 (Havok Engine): This is a very high-end physics engine that strives to simulate real-world physics at quite impressive detail. It takes into account everything from gravity to tourque, momentum to bone-structure, and much more. In HL2, this was used to create a fun game set in a world that at least seemed to act similarly to our own.
Physics Engine #2: Pong: This is a very very basic physics engine that simulates the physics of a world quite different from ours. In the Pong world, there is only linear motion, and simple colision/reflection. When the ball hits a wall or a paddle, it changes its direction accordingly. This was used in Pong to create a very simple environment, with simplified physical laws, to present a fun game that was easy to understand and play.
Physics Engine Example #3: Sonic the Hedgehog: This physics engine slightly exaggerated version of real world physics, including gravity, acceleration, momentum and collision detection. This was used to create a fun game that acted moderately like our own world while allowing certain feats to be acomplished that couldn't actually be done in the real world.
Now, what you need to understand is that in each case, the physics engine calculated what the developers decided would be sufficient for their game to preform the way they wanted it to. The developer of Pong certainly didn't feel that he needed high-level real world physics to make a fun game, and he was right. The developers of HL2 decided to make their game take advantage of high-leve physics both to make the game feel a bit more like it were set in a potential future of this world and to implement fun, physics based gameplay elements.
What I'm trying to say is that the physics in any game should not be judged on how they compare to the real world, but how they compare to the world the developer created (which sometimes happens to be the real world, but not always). In the case of Wii Sports, I guaruntee there is a physics engine in place, that much is apparent from the videos available. I don't expect Wii Sports to have physics at the level of HL2, but there is no need for it to. The game will certainly be fun enough when all they need to calculate is how hard you hit/throw the ball, how it bounces or reflects off of the ground/court, and how other objects react to being hit. There's probably a little bit more to it than that (wind or something, maybe), but that's enough to provide a simple, fun version of the sports they are presenting. The bigger focus of the Wii Sports title is allowing people to play these games with a new control style that feels much more like the real-world game they are based on.
Lastly, as it has also been said, the graphics of Wii Sports are a CHOSEN STYLE, not a representation of the full graphical capability of the Wii. The style was chosen (I imagine) to emphasise on relateability to the avatars (a more abstract avatar is easier to identify as "me" than a higly detailed one, art design 101). Personally, I love the art style they chose, it's cute, it's fun, and it fits it's goal very well.
BusterSpace @ Sep 14th 2006 9:10PM
Wii Bowling. That pwns, hardcore. I can't wait to be a Wii Bowler. I will pwn.
Steve Roger @ Sep 14th 2006 10:11PM
This game is looks to be no better than that star wars light saber game I bought for the tv for my kids. In fact, it looks like garbage. It has like 30 sports moments but it is going to get repetitive fast. Wii sports is a title that would have sold poorly on its own. Typically that is the sort of title that is bundled with technology. It is a throw away to the company. They made a rational decision to unload this E.T. of Nintendo if you know that I mean.
Total garbage. Boo Nintendo.