Critics still coming to terms with Wii's "next-gen-ness"
by Blake Snow 
{ Oct 24th 2006 at 7:25PM }
Wii. Like it or not, the name and the console it represents arguably receive more favorable buzz than any other current game platform. Is it because of a departure from the traditional definition of next-generation gaming, the industry's fascination with its prospects, or that motion-controls with inferior graphics are in-fact a blast to play on a large scale? Hopefully by late November (post launch), we'll be closer to a definitive answer, but some are still obviously and understandably coming to terms with how Nintendo defines next-generation gaming:- Ars Technica on the concept of next generation: "That 'next-gen hardware experience' that I've come to expect as a birthright of console gaming will be missing from the Wii. Things that were graphically and computationally unthinkable in the previous generation will not suddenly become possible with the Wii ... Zelda: Twilight Princess is a launch title for the 'next-gen' Nintendo console. This is a GameCube game, people!"
- Factor 5, developer of the excellent GameCube launch title Rogue Squadron II, is "extremely disappointed" with Wii calling the console a "GameCube 1.5" while ragging on the system's inferior graphics and audio capabilities.
[via Wii Fanboy]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
fawazr @ Oct 24th 2006 7:32PM
Here's the appeal: a console built entirely around a new interface. No issues about region free playback, format wars, high def resolution charts, financing options, or limited supplies.
Funny that it's refreshing to see a company release a simple box that pretty much just plays games.
Lynk Former @ Oct 24th 2006 7:34PM
Factor 5 is loyal to the company they think has the strongest specs in their gaming system. They supported the N64 and GCN because of this fact, they wanted to jump ship to Xbox but decided to wait and now they're making an exclusive game for the PS3.
So of course, it comes as no surprise that Factor 5 feels this way about Wii. It is only natural for them.
Ryan @ Oct 24th 2006 7:35PM
No, I don't feel this way at all. There are simply some developers, like Factor 5, that seek to invent games based on graphics capabilities rather than hardware capabilities. Factor 5 is a one-trick pony: give them specs and they'll cum all over you.
Wii is going to be a huge departure from the norm, and this was obviously Nintendo's strategy from the start. This whole project codenamed "Revolution" was designed to do just that -- be a revolution for the video game industry. Some developers will instantly get it, while others like the dumbasses over at Factor 5 will just look at how many polygons it can put out, be dissatisfied, then turn the other way.
Come this Sunday, I'm reserving my Wii at Toys "R" Us.
nalgae @ Oct 24th 2006 7:35PM
I don't know if I'm the only one here, but I've yet to buy a next-gen system and probably won't buy one till mid or late next year. There simply haven't been enough games that make any of these systems a must have for me.
All the 360 has going for it right now is Dead Rising. Everything else that I've liked can be played on my PC. PS3 and Wii haven't even come out yet. I find it hard to get excited over something that hasn't had time to prove itself yet.
I really don't care about any of the hardware specs. What I look at are the good games each system has, and how well that game plays and looks. I would much rather play a stylized and current-gen game like Okami than another SWPG on a next-gen system (Shooter with pretty graphics).
Generation means nothing to me. I play Mario on the NES during boring lectures. I play Chrono Trigger every other year, just because it's fun.
I don't get why people argue over the spoon when what you should be looking at is what ice cream flavor to enjoy.
Leper Messiah @ Oct 24th 2006 7:36PM
You see, some people are just closed-minded idiots.
Metaridley @ Oct 24th 2006 7:43PM
The graphics aren't THAT bad, guys! Look at the screenshots for Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy...they look GOOD. Not 1080p good, but Nintendo isn't supporting that, anyway.
Stuart @ Oct 25th 2006 11:05PM
I think that when people start throwing around the term "next-gen" it really is in the eye of the beholder.
We all expect graphic and sound boosts in our Next-Gen consoles, (and to a lesser degree a slightly revamped controller that fixes the flaws of the last one)
So why can't a game console that changes the very way you play games be "Revolutionary"?
I'm personally dissapointed Factor 5 is being so narrow minded about the whole thing. They (like many developers) have an amazing opportunity sitting in their lap, and their doing nothing with it.
Wilky @ Oct 24th 2006 7:42PM
Why is it that next generation gaming has to be about the graphics. Could it not be that next generation gaming in the controller.
And what exactly is a generation anyway. Already the hardware in the 360 is getting seriously dated by PC standards. Another year and it will be considered shit.
But of course, if your 14, next gen is all about Dead or Alive Extreme. If your over 14 and playing this game, you need some serious help dude. If your playing this game in groups and are over 21 then you need locking up.
And as for gamerscore tags. If it makes you feel valued. Why not. I appreciate what the Wii is about.
If your talking next gen, come round my place with your console and I g'tee it will blow your Xbox360 out of the water. For less price than the PS3.
Dont you love it.
Optimus Prime @ Oct 24th 2006 7:42PM
E3 means nothing; E3 was basically Wii's honeymoon stage, things were riding high, it was the peak of their hype. Things have come down to Earth; now its time to launch and PS3 has the momentum ..with 360 nowhere to be seen.
I suspect Wii will have strong intial sales based on fanboy hype and Zelda; but, console wars arent won on launches. Or even the year after a console launches (Dreamcast).
How well will Wii do next year when everything there is to do with the wiimote has been done? Are people going to buy Wii games when they can play the Flash version online for free?
Wulkar @ Oct 25th 2006 6:04AM
it may not have superior graphics. but it looks like so much fun and that is what gaming is all about.
Hiro Protagonist @ Oct 24th 2006 7:45PM
Your comments: Quick chaps, change e-mails and names and start acting like fanboys!
We can't have a serious and intelligent discussion!
I agree with most people here, especially nalgae, Chrono Trigger is still a blast.
B33 @ Oct 24th 2006 7:45PM
All the Nintendo fanboys are now getting froggy and starting to bash Factor 5. It's not just graphics Factor 5 is worried about. The capabilities of the Wii are low in all the specs that allow you to have more enemies on screen, better physics,etc. And from a hardware standpoint, it is a Gamecube with a new controller. Is that a bad thing? Yes and no. Yes, because it will prevent advancements in game capabilities. No, because the Gamecube was a solid console. Either way, I will buy one eventually.
elmer @ Oct 24th 2006 7:45PM
I'd like to say that Zelda, Ocarina of time is STILL more visually striking and memorable than at least 99% of medern games released.
Graphics don't make visuals, ARTISTRY DOES.
Vilhelm @ Oct 24th 2006 7:46PM
It seems that most people are missing the point. Nintendo has never called Wii next-gem themselved. Media and other companies have. Nintendo's statement, however, is that Wii is NEW-GEN.
Guru G @ Oct 24th 2006 7:50PM
They simply shouldve released wii-motes for the gamecubes.. a new console just for a new remotes is daylight robbery.
Miniboss @ Oct 24th 2006 7:51PM
If you want more power, then get one of the other two systems, or both. The fact of the matter is, Nintendo was never going to win with horsepower alone. They tried that with the N64 and GameCube, and it got them no where.
So while Ars Technica may be looking for that "next-gen experience" from Zelda, they should ask themselves if they really wanted to play another Zelda game the exact same way as they always have. Would it really be more fun to have prettier graphics but essentially the same gameplay? And Factor 5... well, they left the GameCube for financial reasons, not because of the console's power. So I'm not sure why they even care.
Skippy @ Oct 24th 2006 7:52PM
It's not like Factor 5's opinion matters in the long run; they're only one developer. Major third-party developers like Ubisoft, EA, and Sega are giving the Wii tons of support, so Factor 5 can whine all they want
jarod @ Oct 24th 2006 7:52PM
lets get right down to the facts -
videogames are about one thing and one thing alone - PROVIDING FUN. each successive generation of game console's only goal should be "MAKE NEW, BETTER FUN".
in the past this could be accomplished by things like adding online gaming, and graphical leaps to allow new types of gameplay. these pretty much no longer apply. most recent consoles have been near identical to eachother in terms of capabilities, and they all were stuck with the idea that "more power = more fun", which is downright wrong and ignorant.
nintendo is taking the alternate, logical path. not alot of people own HDtvs? then dont force HD graphics and media formats on the consumer and drive up the console price. are games all starting to play the same way and get monotonous? then create an entirely new way to play, and soon we will see entirely new genres of gameplay, instead of the ol' sports/rpg/FPS/platformer predictability of last gen.
DS proves this by its sales and reviews. sony was stuck with the archaic "more power = more fun" idea for the PSP, and is selling nowhere near as well as ds, including the games. (only 3 million sellers on psp, ds has near a dozen now i think?)
wii is the ONLY next gen system. the competiters are more deserving of the "console 1.5" label, offering very little besides more power.
MikeG @ Oct 24th 2006 7:53PM
The Wii will offer us (it appears) a lot of opportunities to experience games in a fresh new way - with its innovative interface.
The PS3 will offer us (likely) what the PS2 did in the last gen with respect to library - massive selection. That + Blu-Ray + a system that might just wow us with this gen's best graphical WOW factor once we get past launch window titles.
The 360 does offer us (now) the most integrated online experience of the bunch, and while Wii Connect might challenge Xbox Live for the best console online experience, that remains to be seen.
So, for a mere $1600 or so you can have all 3 with a nice little bevy of accessories. Why not cut the fanboyism and just go that route?
thryon @ Oct 24th 2006 7:55PM
I was originally excited by "the Revolution", but the more I heard about it, the more turned off I became. While I may still purchase the console, I am not excited about it anymore. I can purchase a Gamecube (actually I already had a Gamecube) for $99. Why would I purchase a new console that is only marginally better for $250? Because of the Wiimote? I used to own a Sidewinder Freestyle Pro back in 1999 that could do the same thing...I think I still have it in my computer junk box somewhere. While the Xbox 360 was a significant upgrade to the original Xbox and the PS3 looks to be a significant upgrade to the PS2, I do not get the same feeling when looking at the Wii.
While great graphics do not make a game, bad graphics do detract from a great game. If no one cared about graphics, we would all be playing NetHack and Zork instead of Oblivion, or the latest Zelda.
Cynders @ Oct 24th 2006 7:54PM
I felt the same about the DS and refused to get one at first, thinking that it was just a slightly revamped Game Boy Advance.
However, a plethora of incredibly enjoyable games have been published for the DS and I am now happy to own one. Maybe the same will be true for the Wii.
Dux @ Oct 24th 2006 7:55PM
"All the Nintendo fanboys are now getting froggy and starting to bash Factor 5."
I have not seen any bashing in here so far. Just people expressing their negative or positive view point on a company that refuses to accecpt Wii as next-gen.
Moogle @ Oct 24th 2006 7:55PM
I don't think the level of graphics last gen was any inhibition to art direction. And even the Wii has improved from there.
There's been a jump in processor speed every generation just due to Moore's law. This has always been an enabler. Games could suddenly have more depth, 3d, better everything. But what's better about the processors this gen? The graphics can be a little shinier, but not in a way that looks much different. AI can be processed for more cycles, but that doesn't make it suddenly intelligent or lifelike. You can have more enemies, but the players won't be able to interact with them in any way that makes it much of an advantage.
The state of the art is really more important for many of these areas. More shaders, better algorithms for AI, new gameplay mechanics all work just as well for the Wii as they will for the PS3 or Xbox.
The big differences this gen are control and connectivity. Speed is secondary.
elmer @ Oct 24th 2006 7:56PM
As for the argument that power provides more than graphics, I'd question the truth in that.
Seriously, what scenarios that SIGNIFICANTLY affect gameplay elements are possible on either 360 or PS3 and aren't possible on a Wii, or for that matter, an Xbox, Gamecube, PS2, or even dreamcast or PSP?
I'd argue that even accepting differences in physics processing capabilities, there are very few scenarios on those systems that Wii can't handle that the player could deal with in any case. Want 100 enemies on screen at once? Great. There's a PS2 game with 65,535 enemies. You still can't actually deal with more than a couple at a time.
Really new gameplay scenrios will require imagination, and we can tell already where the home of imagination is and isn't.
Victor @ Oct 24th 2006 7:59PM
I know everyone really cares about the graphics a lot, but for me as long as its OKAY im fine with it. I dont need it to be amazing, but i'd rather have a good gameplay and fun then AMAZING graphics.
It going to get to a point that noone will even see the graphic difference, only the difference in the fun they are having.
BUT if you can get a good system with both those, gameplay AND amazing graphics, then that would be grreat and i would for sure get that!
Dux @ Oct 24th 2006 7:59PM
I have not played Wii yet so I can't come to a conclusion on the console.
Jeff @ Oct 24th 2006 8:01PM
"So, for a mere $1600 or so you can have all 3 with a nice little bevy of accessories. Why not cut the fanboyism and just go that route?"
Are you serious or are you joking? Why not "cut the fanboyism" and spend a ridiculous amount of money on hardware before you even buy a game? My wife and I make well north of $100,000 per year combined, and not even I can justify one thousand six hundred freakin' dollars on console hardware alone.
Most people need to make choices. For myself, I've chosen to go the PS3 route for now (for Blu-Ray movies as much as games), and may consider a Wii later when it drops to the $199 price point that it should be at. This is what you can do on an upper middle class salary.
As you make those choices, if you're the kind of person who frequents online forums, you are going to respond when people ask questions about what choices you're making and why. Then others will respond to you, and you will respond back. Sometimes it becomes a debate as you argue over which choices make the most sense. This is not "fanboyism". These are choices and discussions about them.
"Fanboyism" is making nonsensical arguments based on blind loyalty rather than any sort of logical thought. It is a wholly separate thing. You don't need to be a "fanboy" to feel it's a little unreasonable to ask someone to spend $1,600 on all three consoles.
Masaki @ Oct 24th 2006 8:02PM
Wii is next-gen.
It pushes console design foward. Just look at the controller, think for a second what it does.
I mean, imagine playing PS7 with a dual shock...
Pal @ Oct 24th 2006 8:03PM
I still wish that it had great graphics AND the Wiimote.
A one-two punch the Wii won't be, but hopefully the relatively low price (though $50 more and you can net yourself a 360) and the gimmick of the Wiimote will keep it afloat for longer than most expect.
Chris Lawton @ Oct 24th 2006 8:05PM
You know, I can kind of see Factor5's point of view. Our experience with "next-gen" since the beginning of the console wars has been: better graphics and higher specs. The last great "revolution" that video games saw was a jump from cartridge to Disc. Even then, what made the next generation was better graphics and higher specs.
Now, I'm not going to say that the Wii won't be revolutionary. Or that it's not a next-gen system. Next-gen is a buzzword that industry people throw around, because they need a label to seperate the various systems. 'When they came out' is as easy as any other.
Now, to all of the people talking about the massive revolution that Nintendo is bringing. Please remember the last revolution that Nintendo brought. The Virtual Boy. It gave people migraines.
Now, I'm not trying to say that the Wii will fail like the VB did. I like the Wii. I liked the Virtual Boy. I like it anytime a company tries something new. I'm just saying that I don't think Factor5's apprehension is completely unfounded.
Griking @ Oct 24th 2006 8:06PM
I honestly wouldn't have cares less if there wasn't a new "Next Gen" console released in the next 5 or so years. I'm convinced that the full power of the PS2 and original Xbox still haven't been fully utilized.
Secondly, I don't know why everyone's so surprised that they haven't seen anything to encourage them to but a 360 or a PS3. Since when did prettier graphics have anything to do with innovative and engaging gameplay? Console makers will eventually learn (though probably the hard way) that they need to learn how to make more fun games and not just more powerful consoles.
mouse_clicker @ Oct 24th 2006 8:10PM
The ArsTechnica article especially annoyed me. The author is exactly right in that the Wii's graphics do not provide the next gen "wow factor." However, he completely misses the fact that it DOES (or at least hopefully does) provide that very same "wow factor" in terms of interface. Really, if he's going to criticize the Wii for choosing interface wow factor over graphical wow factor, shouldn't he also be criticizing the XBox 360 and PS3 for choosing the graphical wow factor over the interface wow factor? It's not that the next-gen-iness isn't there, it's just in a place it's never been before. The last 3 generation shifts have all been graphical, and if Nintendo hadn't tried something new, this one would be, too.
The Factor 5 comment also sort of got me, but it could very well have been taken out of context. I do think it shows where their priorities are, though- specs (Rebel Strike proved that a long time ago). Ah well. I'm sure Rogue Galaxy will be a lot of fun as long as they don't try to do foot missions.
-Moses
charlie @ Oct 24th 2006 8:12PM
I both agree and disagree with the criticisms. I definately identify with the emotion you get from playing next-gen games on the next-gen console that just feel like nothing else before, and I think that even with the new control system, Wii will lack that feel. However, I appreciate that Nintendo is making innovations outside of raw power and I know that in the end, whether or not I enjoy a game has little to do with the pixel count. I will probably buy a Wii. Saying that, I would have been more enthused about it if they had a $199 pricetag and if they had more than Zelda at launch. Most importantly, I'm sure I'll end up with another next-gen system besides the Wii. Idk if it will be an X360 or a PS3 (I've only held off on the X360 because my little brother has one and I can play it when I'm not away at school).
Nintendo's ability to give the Wii success is now totally dependent on how it works in the Classic titles for download and how it supports developers in innovating their games for the Wii controls.
AndrewNeo @ Oct 24th 2006 8:17PM
People need to stop calling it the Gamecube 1.5 or 2 or whatever. It's not like it has the exact same hardware specs! Sure they could have given Wiimotes to the Gamecube, but the graphics and processor -have- been updated. Besides, there would have been no virtual console love for the Gamecube.
shiftup @ Nov 2nd 2006 2:47PM
Technology moves at a phenomenal rate. its refreshing to see a company that goes sideways with its technology rather than forward. I think Nintendo just looked at what made the ps2 so great and offered something sony couldn't.
Jay @ Oct 24th 2006 8:15PM
I played the Wii at the ninento fusion tour (went only for the wii, not the bands hahah) and it was amazing. The Wiimote is impressive and the graphics are nothing inferior. Excite truck looked beautiful on screen and handled superb.
The PS3 on the other hand is all about graphics and an awkward sorta motion sensor type controller. I can see it now...."The graphics.....they are so beautiful.....but the game play.....is so shitty....."
*runs
Jay @ Oct 24th 2006 8:16PM
*nintendo
SSpectre @ Oct 24th 2006 8:16PM
"now its time to launch and PS3 has the momentum ..with 360 nowhere to be seen." -- #8
PS3 has the momentum? Are you kidding? 400,000 units in North America. 500,000 units worldwide. 0 units in Europe. Sony's lawsuits put Lik-Sang out of business. A lackluster launch window of games. $600. The same online service as PS2, except now you can buy things from Sony. A level of contempt for the consumer that exceeds Nintendo at its worst. A collective arrogance for the PS3 from Sony.
Sony is going to bite the dust hard this round.
Jackson Pritt @ Oct 24th 2006 8:17PM
I have some reservations about the Wii, but overall I'm excited about it. I've owned a DS since the day the DS Light came out in North America and I've been pleasantly surprised at how much *fun* the DS is because of its interface (and inventive games like Trauma Center and Phonix Wright) despite being the "inferior" handheld in terms of graphics and processing power.
I'm hoping that the Wii will be the console version of the DS - slightly underpowered, but immensely accessible and enjoyable because of a unique and intuitive interface. My complaint about the video game market isn't that the graphics aren't sharp enough or that I can't see enough enemies on screen at the same time, it's that too many games are boring clones of games that have come before. The Wii's control scheme offers developers an opportunity to change the way players interact with their games, and I for one am excited to see what happens.
kvnphm1 @ Oct 24th 2006 8:33PM
@4
I completely agree with you. People should play the game not the console. My favorite developer is still going to keep on developing games I want to play whether one console does better then the other one.
Eaode @ Oct 24th 2006 8:20PM
Of course, graphics are all that matter, right? Yeah, the Wii isn't next gen because its graphics aren't as good as the other two right?
People are so stupid. They drool over the number without realizing what it really is. The Wii is providing a brand new experience, and the controller is pushing the envelope on that.
The Wii doesn't have all the power of the other two consoles, and all of a sudden it's a piece of trash that no one can evn bear to develop for. People are so stupid. The Wii may not be competeing with Microsoft and Sony for power, but the Wii is still 3 times what the gamecube was, plus the controller. The graphics look GREAT. No, you can't make out ancient texts on the reflections from dewdrops on individual blades of grass, but the visuals are still of high quality.
No, that hardwood floor cannot withstand a meteor impact, but you can still fucking stand on it.
Liraco @ Oct 29th 2006 8:43AM
I agree graphics are PART of the next-gen equation, but new, bigger, and better game concepts are a larger part of it. When the last generation hit, a ton of new game concepts were born that simply weren't possible due to previous hardware limitation. Honestly though, this "next gen" has yet to prove the same with the new wave of hardware. Maybe eventually we'll get a game that'll justify all that horsepower for something other than eye candy.
HOWEVER, if the Wii can gather momentum like the DS lite and expand the market further, then we'll be seeing a huge increase in all types of crazy game concepts because the interface is something no one else does. Sony tries to imitate but games that truly utilize the sixaxis (read: those that aren't gimmicky) will be few and far between. On the Wii, the Wiimote is an integral part of the experience, peripherals and other controllers are secondary.
I'll consider the Wii a success if it can deliver on the promise of getting my parents (and my non-gaming GF) to play games with us on it and actually have some fun doing it. If it can do just that, then THAT'S when the Wii will truly prove itself as next-gen to me.
Wedge @ Oct 24th 2006 8:31PM
@32
You're confusing Factor 5 with Level 5. Level 5 is a Japanese developer that makes awesome RPG's, like the upcoming Rogue Galaxy. Factor 5 is a California based studio mostly known for the Rogue Squadron series.
Lex @ Oct 24th 2006 8:34PM
I have a 52in HDTV if the Wii games do no look better than current Xbox games on that TV then I have no use for a Wii.
You can talk about the controller all day but if the look of the games makes me want to turn the thing off then I have no use for that console.
twism10000 @ Oct 24th 2006 8:38PM
I use to love Nintendo and I use to be a Nintendo Fanboy. I had the NES, SNES, N64, and Gamecube (I still have the Gamecube). But lets face it guys, where were you with the Gamecube? How come the Gamecube is last is the last gen wars? I have to agree that the Wii is something of a gimmick and not much of an upgrade in terms of power. Wii will do well at the beginning, but I have a feeling that people will get tired of it and tired of the kiddy first party games. My prediction that the Wii will come in last again. Thats just my opinion.
Benjamin Perez @ Nov 3rd 2006 9:58PM
Everyone is tripping about this stuff. the Wii is just meant to be enjoyable. its not meant to show off or bust the others in the next-gen buisness. you guys can't forget nintendo started it all. we can't just throw nintendo away for microsoft or sony. im not saying buy nintendo just because of that but we're being too harsh on nintendo for what they do. Let me set an example.
Graffics
1. Microsoft is great with graffics. why? um...duh Microsoft is a computer company They can easily update graffics and an Xbox 360 is basically a game dedicated computer.
2. Sony,Not a computer industry buy they've had experience with things besides game systems.
3. Nintendo, A straight forward Game industry.
Now back on topic. Nintendo may not be as perfect as Microsoft or sony, But they're doing just what they did for video games long ago. With the Wii,It may look bad to you, but some non-gamers get draged in because they want to try it. I believe people are just scared. They dont want to try new things. they want to stick with microsoft and sony's reapeated style while they're scared to try nintendos new creative style. Sure some things are bad, but this could be the perfect system for the old school gamer, the new gamer,or even the normal gamer. remember, everything is not about violence,graffics,and online features. The Wii, I Believe, Is a system to remind gamers about what had made the industry big and what gave birth to Sega and other things including what nintendo was making from games starting sonys run which in turn started gamecube starting PS2 starting Xbox. So if it wasnt for nintendo we possibly wouldnt have Xbox or playstation. And by now havent we learned to stop doubting nintendo? I believe the Wii will sell fine and lead to a new generation of gaming.
Join The Wii-ligion
Pulse @ Oct 24th 2006 8:52PM
Just goes to show how stupid ppl have become, since when was GFX everything?
In fact GFX are nothing, yes they are visually impressive, but when you look at it, some of the most impressive games ever and will never be forgetten didn't all have the most stunning GFX, it was all in the gameplay.
Gameplay is the most important feature of any game.
I dislike Xbox games, because I either don't enjoy them, or I find them braindead and repetitive, FPSs seem to consist of the same thing over and over again, shoot anything on screen, and thier fighting games, well, if DOA is any example, then there is a serious problem.
Wii has always appealed to all groups of people, colourful and enjoyable games, that people will never forget, even if childish sometimes, the fact still remains that kids are more likly to remember their times as a child growing up with Nintendo then their young adulthood with another console.
Gameplay is the only reason ppl enjoy games, the way they do, no gameplay, no game, if someone told me to name a gaming character, first thing to mind, it would probs be Mario, after the fun I had with him in various Nintendo games, I am never going to remember Master Chief, I'll be suprised if I do, despite the fact I've played Halo several times, another game I will remember is FF7, for its dramatic storyline.
GFX is probs the least important factor of a game.
JPRacer @ Oct 24th 2006 9:05PM
thryon, the Freestyle Pro is more like the Sixaxis. The Wiimote is more advanced.
dvddesign @ Oct 24th 2006 8:56PM
Well, I've noticed that some people are either graphics whores or gameplay whores, sometimes both...
But I, personally, keep thinking back to all the games "I" had the most fun with on the previous generation, and I don't think graphics are all that important.
Katamari Damacy, Grand Theft Auto III-SA, Guitar Hero, Rez, DDR, Lumines, etc.
I found a dearth of good games, great games, and terrible games on all 3 platforms and the handhelds of the last 5-6 years.
The above listed games are games that stood out to me in terms of presentation, unique style of play, and simplified graphics in favor of gameplay. Yes, GTA has TERRIBLE graphics, it really does. When you compare all the stuff you see in more complex shooters and sandbox titles, you realize that they're running the same 2001 engine with minor tweaks and better draw distance. Still doesn't make up for the fact that people's hands are mostly skinned blocks, or that rendering buildings and allowing things like swimming or riding a motorcycle would be considered improvements to the engine.
But still they were all fun. If they were created a decade from now, I'd probably still pick up most of them, even with the graphics they present today. Why? Because the gameplay is what makes these games fun.
Good gameplay is possible without having to resort to blowing your mind with HD level graphics spewing out of a box louder (and hotter) than your hairdryer on high.
Sure, good gameplay AND good graphics are surely welcomed in my house, but if graphics are the only determining factor in a game's development these days, they're going to lose my dollar. Eye candy gets pretty empty after you've seen it the first dozen times. Ask any Final Fantasy fan. Two Words: Limit Breaks
Ouch. @ Oct 24th 2006 9:16PM
Oh, so how games WERE played are now considered shitty!
Great spin Ninty fans, really. "Shitty" gameplay still can bring fun, and you don't need a new interface to have all the fun you could.
The gamecube was one of the best potent consoles out there in the 6th gen, marred by a lack of DVD playback- but it basically got it right. Balance between fun and bling. Now, the Wii's err... a false choice Nintendo's wanting you to take. Graphics, OR their so called "gameplay"- which is basically the same stuff that the GC's small yet impressive catalog has.
We bought consoles for FUN. The 360 and PS3 have, if not more, the equal ammount of FUN that the Wii is gonna bring. Wake up from denial and all the marketing/fanboy spin. A motion-sensing controller isn't gonna bring you more fun when you're already IN the game.
(With the PSP it was different- the system didn't suffer from the lack of another interface, but the relative difficulty to program for it- hence the drought of quality games, and the loadtimes. )