The Wii as a fad

[Steezie]

I personally think the Wii, while being a good idea and very clever, is a fad and wont last exceptionally long on the market.

The Wii just doesnt really have the versatility of even other platforms. You can play tennis and Zelda, Ive also seen an ad for a Call of Duty game where you hold the controllers the same way you hold your rifle and I have to give props to the designers, thats very creative.

But would you really want to stand up there for half hour or so holding your arms up like that or swinging your arms around?

It also limits itself because of the design of the Wii remote. It forces you to use a maximum of four fingers, any other buttons are not accessible unless you bend your hand at odd angles (If they were to add more buttons on the bottom). The motion sensor does add more versatility but overall it has less control than a regular controller.

I see the Wii going the way of the Virtual Boy, a novelty but never actually catching on as a serious contender in the game market.

 

[WhirlwindMonk]

I personally think the Wii, while being a good idea and very clever, is a fad and wont last exceptionally long on the market.

The Wii just doesnt really have the versatility of even other platforms. You can play tennis and Zelda, Ive also seen an ad for a Call of Duty game where you hold the controllers the same way you hold your rifle and I have to give props to the designers, thats very creative.

But would you really want to stand up there for half hour or so holding your arms up like that or swinging your arms around?

It also limits itself because of the design of the Wii remote. It forces you to use a maximum of four fingers, any other buttons are not accessible unless you bend your hand at odd angles (If they were to add more buttons on the bottom). The motion sensor does add more versatility but overall it has less control than a regular controller.

I see the Wii going the way of the Virtual Boy, a novelty but never actually catching on as a serious contender in the game market.

I can see football being a fad. I mean the odd shaped ball and the interesting rules, those are props to the designers. But would you really want to stand out there slinging a ball around and trying to wrestle people to the ground for hours one end?

Sorry man, but that doesn't at all seem a good reason to me. Plus, not all the games will have you standing and swinging your arms around. I can see getting players getting tired faster, but come on. A half-hour? Seriously, that just fulfills all the stereotypes that other people have of gamers. I was in marching band in high school. Standing, holding my instrument out, and then add moving and playing into that, and we'd do it for three hours at a time. Waving my arm around with no weight in it and standing for a bit hardly seems like anything in my eyes.

 

[Dust and Ashes]

I'm actually looking forward to the activity and exercise. I was in at Gamestop the other day and a lady was talking about it and said she got to playing the boxing game and couldn't stop because it was so fun and her arms were sore the next day. I can't speak for anyone else but my big, lazy butt needs some gaming like that.

 

[Dannager]

To be perfectly fair, the games do not require that you move your arms around like a madman to play. Nintendo realized pretty early on that requiring dramatic movements for simple actions would necessarily limit playtime because of tired arms. For an illustration of this:

 

[SteelDisciple]

I personally think the Wii, while being a good idea and very clever, is a fad and wont last exceptionally long on the market.

The Wii just doesnt really have the versatility of even other platforms. You can play tennis and Zelda, Ive also seen an ad for a Call of Duty game where you hold the controllers the same way you hold your rifle and I have to give props to the designers, thats very creative.

But would you really want to stand up there for half hour or so holding your arms up like that or swinging your arms around?

It also limits itself because of the design of the Wii remote. It forces you to use a maximum of four fingers, any other buttons are not accessible unless you bend your hand at odd angles (If they were to add more buttons on the bottom). The motion sensor does add more versatility but overall it has less control than a regular controller.

I see the Wii going the way of the Virtual Boy, a novelty but never actually catching on as a serious contender in the game market.

3rd party developers would disagree with you....since it does have the largest support of any system.

You also have to keep into account that some 3rd party companies (with more on the way most likely) are utilizing new programs which EXPAND on the motions you can use in a game.


As for standing and waving your arms around for hours. That's exageration...the commercials completely exagerate...you can do as little or as much motion as you like. You could sit on the couch and play an entire game of Call of Duty without jerking all over the place. If you watch some of the gamer magazine people play it...they are only slightly moving the controller, with a minor flick of the wrist they are accomplishing what some people emphasise.

I'm pretty confused on your statement that the motion sensor limits your control more than a normal controller...considering there is much larger variety in what you can do in-game with it than by merely pressing a button.

Many people said the DS would bomb....and that the superior graphics of the PSP would put it out to pasture....the DS was a fad....and now the DS owns most of the market.

 

[ravendta]

Actually, I think Nintendo is the only sane company right now. If things continue like this, then the PlayStation and Xbox lines will end up being classified as gaming PCs (which they already are, technically) and Nintendo will be all alone in the console gaming market once again. Maybe that'll bring Sega out of retirement from console manufacturing.

Of the three options, right now I am going to try to pick up a a Wii sometime in December if I can find one. If not, I'll wait till after the new year (I'm sure there will be plenty by then). But the Xbox 360 is all about shooters and sports, and the PS3 is way too much money for way too few must-have titles.

And, we're getting to a point where the graphics upgrades aren't that great anymore. Look at most of the games on the 360 - sure, they look better than original Xbox stuff, but not by that much. Same could be said of PS3, with the exception of FFXIII and MGS4. Nintendo saw this (How much more "real" can Mario and Link look anyway - they're SUPPOSED to be cartoonish looking figures) and decided to try to make gaming more interactive rather than keep pushing graphics down our throats.

I mean, good graphics are nice, but if the game isn't fun, who cares? (I'm looking at you, Microsoft.)

 

[f U z ! o N]

if i was worried about great graphics i would get a gaming PC not a ps3. wii all the way! most inventive way to play games i've ever seen!