curl-6 said:
Soundwave said:
curl-6 said:
The satisfaction of smashing enemies or propelling Mario into the air with a shake of the Wiimote in Galaxy 1/2, or using the pointer to sweep up star bits, or balancing Mario on a rolling ball or a surfing stingray using tilt is worth way, way more to me than just a HD coat of paint. And Splatoon's controls, while good, lack the directness of literally pointing at the screen.
I'm not talking about commercial viability here, I'm talking about, as the topic says, whether I personally "would like to see Nintendo oneday go back to the Wiimote". I would, because in my opinion is blows dual analogue out of the water with superior aiming and the potential for a whole range of immersive actions that buttons cannot replicate.
|
I think Splatoon's controls are superior to Prime 3 honestly. They are the best controls I've ever used in a shooter, ever and you have constant access to dual analog sticks on top of that.
More horsepower can offer more expansive environments and so that just an "HD coat of paint" as well.
The "immersive action" stuff ... really, I think it got tired when you really realize how inaccurate the Wiimote (and Kinect as well) really are. They missed a lot of commands and the Wiimote can't even get basic things right even with WM+ ... it can't recognize depth for example.
That means if you move thrust the controller towards the screen, like a stabbing motion with a sword, the Wiimote doesn't recoginize it. So 1:1 control is just not there ... all it does is approximate certain angles.
After a while I think basically what happened is you started to see that motion based gaming is extremely limited in "real" full scale games. It's best left to mini-game collections and how many games can you make like that before it gets boring.
Motion gaming's future lies with VR applications. That's where it makes sense. But a traditional game console, IMO it just not needed.
In six years, Nintendo made maybe two truly *great* games that really utilized the Wiimote. That says a lot.
|
The "more horsepower makes better games" argument doesn't hold true in my opinion, as when Nintendo went HD with Wii U, their games did not improve other than the aforementioned "coat of paint".
The Wiimote senses depth-based actions like stabbing just fine in games like Red Steel 2, Skyward Sword, and Metroid Prime 3. Slashing an enemy with the swing of my own arm, or ripping off an enemy shield with the grapple beam in Prime 3 felt fantastic. Was it perfect 1:1? No. But there was a connection, and carrying out actions in a video game setting using my own physical movements was freaking awesome.
I still play a number of Wii U games that support it with the Wiimote, like COD and Tropical Freeze, because it simply feels better than traditional controls.
|
thats not what he said, he is saying more power can allow a game to do more things, IE bigger worlds, now whether that is better to you or not is on you. But keep in mind stuff like Xenoblade Chronicles X wouldnt be possible on the WIi so i dont know how people can say more "horsepower" isnt important.
As for your examples, i notice 2 of 3 of those games used motion PLUS, the original Red Steel was an inaccurate mess and TP wasnt that much better, its interesting how people straight ignore the shitty inaccurate games, ( which is a lot) and Prime 3 is FP which is just pointer which has existed for years. Now had the Wiimote had Plus capabilities form the onset it would have fared a bit better a least among most gamers and it might still be more important.
