Spore's developer: "The Wii is a Piece of $hit"

[99.vikram]

Game's aren't the ****ing Mona Lisa. Games are fun, and that's what the Wii is for.

With that attitude, Half-life would have been a failure compared to "fun" games like Quake 2.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

Game's aren't the ****ing Mona Lisa. Games are fun, and that's what the Wii is for.

Whats wrong with the games trying to be the Mona Lisa? As long as that is not the only thing going for it, the game has as much potential (and possibly a bit more)

 

[Jintor]

My ass. Half-Life 2 was fun before art, and that made it my game of choice.

/EDIT Half-Life also. Agreed, though, eVader. But fun should be the primary thing.

 

[Warbie]

Game's aren't the ****ing Mona Lisa. Games are fun, and that's what the Wii is for.

Exactly.

 

[StardogChampion]

I want to see the the progression of AI and photo-realism. I want mind-bending physics. I want to see evolution in storytelling and narrative techniques. I want NPCs that don't require the immense suspension of disbelief.

I personally don't feel the Wii is a platform built to succeed in any of these categories. Some because the specs aren't up to snuff, others because I don't think much of the development behind it is really gearing for it. But whatever. That's me, and everybody else is enjoying it. So it simply won't get my purchase (or much of my praise).

You say all that, but do you remember all the complaining about HL2's AI which is debatably inferior to HL1's - a game that came out 5/6 years before?

Oblivion is another good example. The NPC's are extremely unrealistic. They walk around like pieces of wood. Their voices are hilariously bad in 9/10 cases. The horse riding is worse than a little shareware game called Mount & Blade.

Do you know what would go into creating a photo-realistic game? Only the larger companies would be able to put forward the cash/time to make one, and larger companies will always take less risks.

AI will not progress massively, and it's ultimately impossible for a gaming company to create decent AI with 2 geeks coding it in C++.

Some of the games pushing storytelling are probably on the DS anyway.

 

[Solaris]

I agree, my brother and sister got a wii for christmas, imo it's shit.

My main problem is the detection of the wiimote is awful,on wii sports it just doesn't work at all. Golf is a nightmare to play, boxing... well it seems no matter what I do it just does something random.

My brother got excite truck, absolutely shit game. Wouldn't pass for ten quid on a PS2, the controls on the wii just make it more annoying, again when you play this you can already see the limitations of the controller, when you tilt to turn, it turns fully, it seems impossible to half turn, I think the controller just sends out a binary signal or something 'tilted to the left' 'not titled to the left'.

And wii tennis, wtf is that! I was so disappointed with how you have to use timing when you hit the ball. The wiimote is shit, the virtual console is over priced, the games are crap.

I'm so glad I got clothes for Christmas instead.

 

[StardogChampion]

My main problem is the detection of the wiimote is awful,on wii sports it just doesn't work at all. Golf is a nightmare to play, boxing... well it seems no matter what I do it just does something random.

You're not holding it properly then. Look at baseball to notice it easier.

And wii tennis, wtf is that! I was so disappointed with how you have to use timing when you hit the ball.

Real tennis players have to wait for the ball to reach a certain spot for them to aim it. That's how you play tennis. If you're right handed the ball has to be closer to you to hit it to the right hand side.

 

[Solaris]

You're not holding it properly then. Look at baseball to notice it easier.


Real tennis players have to wait for the ball to reach a certain spot for them to aim it. That's how you play tennis. If you're right handed the ball has to be closer to you to hit it to the right hand side.

Yes but you also get the choice of the angle of your racket and such.

 

[StardogChampion]

It's a free minigame. It's not going to have havok physics.

 

[ríomhaire]

a quote from a Nintendo executive saying the company only wanted to make "fun" games.

It seems Nintendo are the only ones who haven't lost the point of video games.

 

[AmishSlayer]

I'll concede that Nintendo has a very narrow vision when it comes to gaming - Make games that are just plain FUN to play. How fun a game is has nothing to do with graphics, it has to do with implementation core gameplay mechanics.

My only complaints with the Wii right now is the stupid online support Nintendo is apparently bringing out (the friend code system) and the fact that 90% of 3rd party developers aren't even trying to bring something relatively innovative to the Wii. Look at the half-assed attempt of Far Cry we saw. Compare those graphics and control mechanics to games like Metroid Prime 3 or Mario Galaxy's great visuals and tight control and you can just tell that it was spit out last-minute.

But even that can't get me down about the Wii because Nintendo has always had the best 1st party titles. Mario Galaxy, Mario Party, Mario sports, Metroid, Zelda, Smash Bros, etc. The list goes on. THESE are the titles I bought a Wii for. They may not all have the best narrative, graphical effects and dazzling physics that people seem to care so much about in EVERY ONE of their games...but they are the best franchises I have ever played.

I like how all the Wii haters came out of the woodwork to support this guy's misguided JOKE about the Wii and Nintendo.

 

[Absinthe]

It seems Nintendo are the only ones who haven't lost the point of video games.

See, I personally think this is a very backward attitude to have.

Games should be fun, no doubt. Just like films should be enjoyable to watch. But surely there is more to it than a simple "catch" in gameplay mechanics. Neither of the KOTOR games were particularly new or innovative in terms of their combat, but it was their presentation and narrative that drew people in (and which people still rave about to this day).

In any case, the idea that Nintendo makes "fun" games whereas everybody else strives to make "non-fun" games is specious, and any gamer with half a brain should recognize how dumb it is.

 

[StardogChampion]

They only rave about it because it's Star Wars.

 

[Absinthe]

They only rave about it because it's Star Wars.

Sure, because everybody who bought and played those games were die-hard Star Wars fans...

 

[Gray Fox]

They only rave about it because it's Star Wars.

That is simply not true, the game is praised for it combines great narrative with meaningful choices and thought trough game play.

What is fun, is different for everyone else, the Wii is meant for a certain kind of audience, and Nintendo certainly does not pretend to cater to everyone, so there is no basis for this Wii is superior to everything else attitude.

 

[VictimOfScience]

In such a forum as GDC one should never talk like that. Its completely unprofessional and juvenile and I think this guy is an absolute idiot for making such comments to his fellow game developers. His apology reflects just how stupid his comments actually were.

 

[NightBlade]

NES

Super NES

Wii

Super Wii

Swiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

Right on man, I agree with you.

 

[Naudian]

Damn straight, you know it's gonna happen too.

 

[Krynn72]

I think the Spore developer should have put a "In My Opinion" at the end of his rant, and saved everyone from this discussion.

 

[StardogChampion]

That is simply not true, the game is praised for it combines great narrative with meaningful choices and thought trough game play.

Totally disagree. The narrative wasn't particularly better than any RPG's that have come before it.

What I was saying is that if it was called Sci-Fi Quest 2004 nobody would be talking about it's narrative etc etc.

 

[ríomhaire]

See, I personally think this is a very backward attitude to have.

Games should be fun, no doubt. Just like films should be enjoyable to watch. But surely there is more to it than a simple "catch" in gameplay mechanics. Neither of the KOTOR games were particularly new or innovative in terms of their combat, but it was their presentation and narrative that drew people in (and which people still rave about to this day).

In any case, the idea that Nintendo makes "fun" games whereas everybody else strives to make "non-fun" games is specious, and any gamer with half a brain should recognize how dumb it is.

TBH I was only being half-serious. Of course there's more to games than fun, God knows I've spent too much time looking at Half-Life's story. I don't think that fun is the only important thing for a game, but I see it as the most-important.

Was the part about inovation directed at my post too? I don't understand how it had anything to do with it. Excecution and quality are much more important than innovation. Half-Life 2 wasn't innovative but it was a fantastic game.

No, I don't think that Nintendo is the only company trying to make fun games but I think that they have the right idea, at least in one aspect. Graphics and innovation often outshadow gameplay and player experience which is a huge problem in my opinion. Of course, I'm not saying that I want developers to ignore graphics or stay like everything else, that would be horrible. Innovation and graphics are important, but they are things to add to the overall experience, not to make the experience.

 

[Gray Fox]

Totally disagree. The narrative wasn't particularly better than any RPG's that have come before it.

What I was saying is that if it was called Sci-Fi Quest 2004 nobody would be talking about it's narrative etc etc.

Licenses can only gain you popularity with the public and increase your sales, but they make reviewers extra skeptical since licensed games usually suck. And the game received numerous good reviews and game of the year awards. A movie license can't get you that.
Besides that Bioware has a very good track record.

 

[Asknoone]

Eh, I haven't played the Wii yet. I've never been a Nintendo person though, and whilst the Wii certainly looks funs (yeah, I would like one) I....I dunno. Amazingly fun or not it still gets point for doing something different. The "Wii is shit." comment is very stupid though.

You say all that, but do you remember all the complaining about HL2's AI which is debatably inferior to HL1's - a game that came out 5/6 years before?

It's hilarious how many people actually consider this. Let alone the amount that believe it.

 

[Jintor]

Mind you, I'mma thinking the developer dude was probably more pissed about the fact that he had to pull X amount of performance from the Wii which you could only get Y amount of performance from.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

It's hilarious how many people actually consider this. Let alone the amount that believe it.

TBH things did a seem a bit more rigid in terms of AI in Half-Life 2, maybe it was just me - but it seemed as if the combine soldiers made little to no attempt to communicate with one another (something we saw over "We've Got Hostiles" chapter quite a bit.) I sorely missed the feeling of enemies that are genuinely coming after you in coordinated squads. In Half-Life 2 I feel more as if I'm mowing through "trash mobs", as they would put it in mmorpg terms, or simply cluster ****s of soldiers placed in the map as something to blast through before you get to your next objective or landmark.

 

[Asknoone]

It's to do with style of play. HL2 is a fairly easy game and you can gun down the soldiers quick. They don't really have to time to actually 'think' as they do. Anyone who thinks the HL1 AI is actually "better" though is an idiot.

 

[Zephos]

But even that can't get me down about the Wii because Nintendo has always had the best 1st party titles. Mario Galaxy, Mario Party, Mario sports, Metroid, Zelda, Smash Bros, etc. The list goes on. THESE are the titles I bought a Wii for. They may not all have the best narrative, graphical effects and dazzling physics that people seem to care so much about in EVERY ONE of their games...but they are the best franchises I have ever played.

I'm in the exact same boat, only reason I got the Wii was for the first party franchises... the controller was a bonus

Also, on the subject of fun games... I have never found a game to be more fun and entertaining than Super Smash Brothers Melee with a couple of mates.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Games are an art form, and the only thing holding them back is people saying that fun is all that matters.
It does matter, but there are games out there that are superior to movies and paintings in terms of resonance.

That being said, the Wii is inexpensive and accessable. If anything, it'll get more people drawn into games so that they can start thinking about them that way.
It's basically like a reboot of what games are about, because they are currently couched in technical language and inaccessable controls. They're very nearly taking it back to pong and starting over.

Meanwhile, the zelda and metroid series at least are pretty damn artsy. Also, it's a gamble, but their ease with promoting small-scale developers could lead to future breakouts.

Sony has a far better track record for genuinely artistic games (Metal Gear, Silent Hill, Siren, Shadow of the Collosus, etc.), but their new console - with the huge price and lack of innovation outside graphics - just makes things more elitist and inaccessable to the layman.

Keep in mind also that art =/= realistic and gritty. Katamari Damacy is utterly brilliant.

The article does have a point that shit like Wii Sports, Wario and Rayman and the whole "minigame" phenomenon are a pox on games, however.
Seemingly the instant any game becomes multiplayer, it turns utterly vapid.
It's a crying shame that feaking WoW is the closest multiplayer has come to artistic integrity.

 

[Warbie]

Games are an art form, and the only thing holding them back is people saying that fun is all that matters.

I disagree completely. It's in striving to make games fun and engaging that advances in physics, narrative, gfx, gameplay, 'artyness', come to be. Nintendo games are clearly centered around being fun first, but anyone who accuses them of holding the industry back or not innovating is completely clueless (I honestly can't think of a single develepor that has inovated even slightly as much)

That being said, the Wii is inexpensive and accessable. If anything, it'll get more people drawn into games so that they can start thinking about them that way.

I've read quite a few statements similar to this and half resent the notion that the Wii is only good for drawing in non gamers and introducing them to our hobby, suggesting that they'll move onto to 'proper' games later. I'm almost certainly putting words in your mouth here, but have met a few people who feel this way.

The DS and Wii have both attracted many new people into video games (my mum plays both regularly!), but I feel that very, very few of these will ever consider moving over to more traditional games on other platforms. It's the accessibility of controls that you mentioned later that appeals so much - Nintendo's ability to make even the simplest thing enjoyable (I was 'playing' with the weather channel for about 30 mins last night) does the rest.

Meanwhile, the zelda and metroid series at least are pretty damn artsy.

I completely agree. Mario 64 was every bit as 'arty' as Ico or MGS. Galaxies looks wonderful and i'd be suprised if Metroid isn't up there with the most engaging games on any platform this year. Shrugging off Nintendo's ability to craft deep games because they also produce many (great) party titles is something quite a few people are guilty of, and it's pretty stupid.

Keep in mind also that art =/= realistic and gritty. Katamari Damacy is utterly brilliant.

:cheers:

The article does have a point that shit like Wii Sports, Wario and Rayman and the whole "minigame" phenomenon are a pox on games, however.

Now that's bollox. Wii Sports is superb, and still one of my most played of this year. Some of the games may be throwaway, but Tennis and Bowling are genius (I'll always have fond memories of Christmas day, my dad bowling, drunk, with a silly hat on). It's certainly one of the best party games ever made, and one that consistently results in either drunken laughter or sternfaced competition. Has money ever exchanged hands as much over any other video game other than online poker?

This is where many people seem to miss the point with the Wii - it has more in common with board games than the traditional gaming consoles we've been playing over the years. You sit around the Wii and play games with friends and family in the way you get together to play Monopoly (the fact that we're guaranteed some superb first party single player games is just gravy). It is the most sociable form of gaming by far - and couldn't further away from lan parties and online gaming, in which the focus is nearly always on the game everyone is playing. Don't get me wrong, I have an unhealthy love for WoW, but this isn't social gaming - it's irc with monsters to kill.

Quite simply, at what it does, the Wii owns hard. People may not be into the type of gaming it offers (I can't imagine why), but, hey, it'd be boring if we all liked the same things anyways.

(Woohoo - a long post and a didn't mention Halo once)

 

[Solaris]

I really don't get why people enjoy wii bowling, it's about half as fun as bowling in real life, which isn't that great anyway.

 

[Asknoone]

I won't say it Warbs.

 

[Cormeh]

I really don't get why people enjoy wii bowling, it's about half as fun as bowling in real life, which isn't that great anyway.

...That's really nothing to do with the Wii then, is it?

 

[Warbie]

I really don't get why people enjoy wii bowling, it's about half as fun as bowling in real life, which isn't that great anyway.

Probably because it's in the living room, with all the convinience that offers - rather than being stuck next to an annoying family of chavs and wearing shoes that contain a swimming pools worth of sweat. I never really liked the real thing, and can rarely be bothered to travel to spend money on it, but have a very soft spot for Wii Bowling. Being able to play better than a pro certainly helps too. Games are always very close when I play with friends and the score is very high - more than a few times we've commented on how much more exciting it is than the real thing. It's also very disposable - you don't have to take a chunk out your evening - have a few drinks and then decide to have a few games.

I won't say it Warbs.

This time it realy does have nothing to do with me being, as you like to put it, an old skool gamer

 

[Asknoone]

I know it has nothing to do with it. I just like to say it when you get all Nintendo.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I disagree completely. It's in striving to make games fun and engaging that advances in physics, narrative, gfx, gameplay, 'artyness', come to be. Nintendo games are clearly centered around being fun first, but anyone who accuses them of holding the industry back or not innovating is completely clueless (I honestly can't think of a single develepor that has inovated even slightly as much).

Innovations are good, but saying that they cause art to happen is like saying that the greatest painters are caused by the most expensive modern paint.

I acknowledge that Nintendo is extremely innovative in terms of technology, given that the wiimote is the best thing to happen to gaming in decades, but in terms of artistic merit, the games themselves do lag behind for the most part.

I've read quite a few statements similar to this and half resent the notion that the Wii is only good for drawing in non gamers and introducing them to our hobby, suggesting that they'll move onto to 'proper' games later.

I was thinking in terms of interaction. Wiimotes are simply easier and more intuitive than most other control schemes. The awfulness of the average keyboard even puts me off playing some hotkey-heavy games, and even the dual-shock makes aiming a bitch.

I'm not saying that people should play the wii until they graduate to "superior" consoles.
I'm simply proposing that Nintendo apply their superior controls to Sony-style art games.
Currently the nearly entire focus of the wii seems to be multiplayer, where little or no artistic innovation takes place.

I completely agree. Mario 64 was every bit as 'arty' as Ico or MGS. Galaxies looks wonderful and i'd be suprised if Metroid isn't up there with the most engaging games on any platform this year. Shrugging off Nintendo's ability to craft deep games because they also produce many (great) party titles is something quite a few people are guilty of, and it's pretty stupid.

I'd point out that there is a difference between graphical beauty and real artistry. Mario has merits, but the series is more pop-culture phenomenon than anything else.

It's abstract and engaging, but you won't find any metaphors in there. Wheras Zelda and Collosus mess around with archetypes and sony games directly address philisophical, psychological and cultural issues.

Basically, you have to ask yourself what Mario means. You could certainly read a critique of capitalism in his working-class background and constant collection of money, despite thwarted attempts at improving his social status by having king bowser steal the princess from him constantly.
But you have to wonder how much of that is intentional, or at least whether it's a deep enough message to merit another dozen sequels and spinoffs.

The point is the Wii is good at multiplayer, but multiplayer is inevitably more akin to a sport than an art. If people want to see games as more than just diversions, there need to be more intelligent single-player games.

 

[esplin]

I think what most of the people here don't understand is that the Nintendo DS basically saved videogames in Japan. Videogame sales had been falling for the last 5 years until the DS stormed onto the scene.

The main thing that Nintendo is trying to address is the lack of availability in videogames. Take Half-Life 2 for example. The people who played HL1 will want more of a challange, since they've been playing FPS for 10+ years. But what about the people who've never played FPS. HL2 has a very steep learning curve. If my mom or dad picked it up they would be fighting 10+ CPs while still trying to learn how to aim. Valve tried to address this with difficulty levels, but that still doesn't make up for the experience gap.

What Nintendo has tried to do with the Wiimote and the DS is create a format that new gamers and veterans have to learn together. Wii Sports is an excellent example. I played that game with a friend who never playes videogames, yet he was kicking my butt at the start of the game. We leveled off in skill after ten minutes but I was still surprised how quickly he learned how to play.

The sales for both the DS and the Wii show that there are a large group of people out there who wanted to play videogames, but found them too daunting to attempt.

 

[Kyorisu]

That's funny though esplin I not sure how the current Xbox version of Hl2 turned out but it would have some sort of auto aim. The upcoming HL releases for PS3 and X360 will most likely also feature an auto aim hence making the game easier.

 

[Fishlore]

I think calling video games art is an insult to art. Video games are diarrhea for the senses in my opinion. Sure it's a fun hobby. Just because it's a hobby of mine, I don't delude myself into believing that video games are a positive, influential and enriching part of my life.

 

[Warbie]

is like saying that the greatest painters are caused by the most expensive modern paint.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Aritisits are driven to make the most affecting art they can. I see this as no different to striving to make a game as fun as possible - the attempt is always to make a video game fun, whether this is achieved through focussing on the arty side of things or by jumpng on peoples heads is just how you get there.

The awfulness of the average keyboard even puts me off playing some hotkey-heavy games, and even the dual-shock makes aiming a bitch.

Definately agree with you here.

I'm simply proposing that Nintendo apply their superior controls to Sony-style art games.

And they will, over time (I feel they already did with Zelda TP). Metroid Prime on the GC is every bit as 'arty' as any Sony game i've played, infact more so than most. More games of this type may appear on Sony consoles, i'll give you that.

Currently the nearly entire focus of the wii seems to be multiplayer, where little or no artistic innovation takes place.

And where's the problem in this? - when I sit down to play Samba or Wario Ware with friends none of us want artistic innovation. However, I guarantee that when you're walking Samus through a deserted space ship in Corruption, the atmosphere will be so thick you'll need a lazer to cut through. There will be plenty of 'art', just in the games that need it.

I'd point out that there is a difference between graphical beauty and real artistry.

That's a pretty gray area ....

It's abstract and engaging

.... since when did abstract stop becoming art?

Jumping through a painting for the first time in Mario 64 remains one of the most magical moments in video gaming for me - up there with my favourite Disney memories as a kid. If a game is powerful enough to knock decades off my age - when just running about and climbing a tree for the fun of it is enough - then that is some seriously engaging software.

Basically, you have to ask yourself what Mario means. You could certainly read a critique of capitalism in his working-class background and constant collection of money, despite thwarted attempts at improving his social status by having king bowser steal the princess from him constantly.
But you have to wonder how much of that is intentional, or at least whether it's a deep enough message to merit another dozen sequels and spinoffs.

Dude There's space for metaphor in some video games, but not Mario. This doesn't make it any less accomplished. Personally i'd take a more abstract title over something like MGS - which to me is little more than an anime wank-fest, albeit it a great fun one. At the moment I don't look to video games for 'philisophical, psychological and cultural issues' as it's so rare to find them done well. It's always a nice suprise when they are, though.

The point is the Wii is good at multiplayer, but multiplayer is inevitably more akin to a sport than an art. If people want to see games as more than just diversions, there need to be more intelligent single-player games.

We need more games of every type, and new types of games. Genre should collide and spawn new ones and control methods should change and adapt. I want mindless multiplayer, story driven single layer, co-op, and amusing ways to kill a few minutes. The Wii is good at multiplayer in a way no other console is - this alone is deserving of much praise.

I agree that we definately need more intelligent singe player games, but this would be a far duller hobby if that was all there was.

 

[Absinthe]

I think calling video games art is an insult to art. Video games are diarrhea for the senses in my opinion. Sure it's a fun hobby. Just because it's a hobby of mine, I don't delude myself into believing that video games are a positive, influential and enriching part of my life.

And why can't they be? The current backlog of videogames that have come into existence up to this point may not compare to the Mona Lisa, but that is not to say they don't have the potential to.

And Warbie, I think you're still confusing visual aesthetic with "art". I employed quotes around that word because I realize there are multiple ideas of what it consists of. But for the purpose of simplification, just think of it as "deeper meaning".

As far as I can tell, there is no deeper meaning in Metroid, Mario, or even Zelda. There is no symbolism. No metaphor. No hidden subtext. No abstract thought process. No commentary. They all exist within their own respective enclosed worlds with little outreach in connecting to their audiences other than "Save the princess" or "Get the shiny coins". As much as I dislike the MGS series, I can appreciate its attempts at trying to integrate philosophy into its titles.