WiiMote - Is It Really Revolutionary?

[Dongo]

OMFGZ! Griever is right. You guys are wrong.

The contrller does not "revolutionize" anything. Its just a different way to play. Personaly i think it sux. I was playing far cry and trying to throw a grenade without moving the remote was hard, so all my grenades didnt go where i wanted them to.

If anything, PS3 is revolutionary. It keeps all the buttons necisary to play previous games where as the wii need that 25-30 dollar add on to play old games you download. If it was revolutionary, why will all the games be FPS and mario party? The only thing its good for is golf, baseball, bowling, shooting. You will see a lot of shooting games cause thats the best BUT after playing those games on wii then ps3, i had a lot more options on ps3.

On the wii i didnt worry much about taking cover, it felt like a waste of time. On the ps3 i would take cover, throw grenades without worrying id throw it off to the side or to hard or to soft, even bum rushed 10 guys and that was wicked cool. The wii controller is different, not good but very limiting. Also you wont have intense fights cause it wont be able to handle much on screen action.

Its not going to last!

 

[WiiHoldOnTight]

OMFGZ! Griever is right. You guys are wrong.

The contrller does not "revolutionize" anything. Its just a different way to play. Personaly i think it sux. I was playing far cry and trying to throw a grenade without moving the remote was hard, so all my grenades didnt go where i wanted them to.


Also you wont have intense fights cause it wont be able to handle much on screen action.

Farcry sucks (4.0 IGN review?) the controls are VERY glitchy..

You won't have intense fights? What about Call Of Duty 3?
(Last scene)[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIf5tTHe0_E[/MEDIA]



Now Tell Me That Doesn't Look Fun

 

[Dongo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYBzKFm-rd0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFJ60FfSYAA

Now tell me they didnt make those look fun. It jut LOOKS fun. If you didnt like those, the GB and NES ones make it that much better.

 

[WiiHoldOnTight]

Well Only the Glove looks cool..

I wanna get it now :lol::wtf:

 

[Griever]

I'd still like to know which games you keep referring to on the C64.

I'd love to go and look for myself but we sold the C64 a long time ago. I think the tapedeck was broken or something so we just sold the other parts and the 100+ games we had for it. I do know that we had a lightgun and some glove-like thing, though, although I never worked out which of the games the glove-like thing was for. Haha xD

Secondly, I agree it is not revolutionary, but using the new cancer treatment as my example, radation, surgery. Someone then realised to do them together instead of seperate.:idea:

Someone already put the ideas of motion sensors and videogames together, though, so I don't really see what kind of point you are making.

You seem to prefer a pad?
Then why buy a Wii ???ut:

I love the Wii and the WiiMote - I just hate the way fanboys/girls continuously spew out the idea that it is so new and revolutionary. It's not. It's good, it's fun, I love it, but it's not revolutionary.

p.s. I hear Sonic and Mario are teaming up for an olympics game so you'll be able to answer your own question on the sports issue, and as for swimming being more popular than golf?, thats why there has been no swimming titles since the "breathe" "swim" on hyper sports.

>.> Sonic can run at the speed of sound and Mario, well, he can jump on people and crush them with his fat arse. I fail to see how the two can combine to make an Olympics game.

As for the no swimming titles thing; the answer to that is simple. Swimming is always included in Olympic Games titles. Unless, of course, you want to try and say that the Olympic Games isn't as popular as Golf >_>;

 

[Dongo]

so pretty much this is what your trying to say...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpeLo8zsiNQ

 

[miiguy]

I'd love to go and look for myself but we sold the C64 a long time ago. I think the tapedeck was broken or something so we just sold the other parts and the 100+ games we had for it. I do know that we had a lightgun and some glove-like thing, though, although I never worked out which of the games the glove-like thing was for. Haha xD

Still, just a light gun then.

Someone already put the ideas of motion sensors and videogames together, though, so I don't really see what kind of point you are making.

Again no examples? Not being funny, I'd like to agree with you as you make some good points but I am finding it difficult when you show no proof.

I love the Wii and the WiiMote - I just hate the way fanboys/girls continuously spew out the idea that it is so new and revolutionary. It's not. It's good, it's fun, I love it, but it's not revolutionary.

I 100% agree with you, the magic word being "fun"

>.> Sonic can run at the speed of sound and Mario, well, he can jump on people and crush them with his fat arse. I fail to see how the two can combine to make an Olympics game.

It's not real, honestly.

As for the no swimming titles thing; the answer to that is simple. Swimming is always included in Olympic Games titles. Unless, of course, you want to try and say that the Olympic Games isn't as popular as Golf.

Swimming and Olympics is far more popular than golf but in terms of game releases, Olympic games are released every 4 years. And generally one of them. Tiger Woods ??? Every year. (Granted there's not much point mind!:ciappa: )

 

[CantGetAWii]

The picture was there because someone else used pictures as a way of showing the difference. If you don't know how to take something in it's proper context then don't try to get in on the argument about it, okay?

As for Sports - Wii Sports was good but you do realise not all sports are so kind to the WiiMote, right..? Why do you think those five sports were picked instead of more popular sports..? Track events, football, swimming events and cycling are all sports infinately more popular than any of the five sports presented on Wii Sports and it is sports like this I was referring to.

Again, though, if you don't understand context then don't get into the argument to start with. It's a sure way to lose.


My whole point is that it isn't a revolutionary device :yesnod:

Wow, Track events , cycling and swimming more popular than tennis, baseball, boxing, golf and bowling. Um I dont think so. And ok football is quite popular, but the other three not so much.

revolutionary - markedly new or introducing radical change

The point of the pictures was that you were saying that those things all used motion control or some nonsense like that. And that the method was the same. Well I dont see house of the dead 4 with a wireless controller.
The thing is the Wiimote uses those old things of the past but changes them a lot. Wireless controller..motion sensoring. That is radical change. And im sorry but the wiimote looks nothing like the pad you showed underneath it.

 

[hiredgoonz]

Griever,

You're wrong...sorry 'bout that, but it's true.

You've used quite a few wordy posts to argue what is essentially a subtle, semantic point. Even at that, you're still wrong.

The Wii (or Wiimote, don't see how you can really separate the two conceptually) is a revolutionary game development.

None of the other control mechanisms you've pointed out "were" the system at a basic level.

Light guns, dance pads, steering wheels, etc. were all accessories to augment the tired control stick with buttons design that really hasn't changed, except for adding more buttons and sticks, since the Atari 2600.

The Wii is not using the remote as an accessory for a few special games, it is both the interface for, and control mechanism of, the console.

Does Nintendo deserve a Nobel prize for it? Of course not, it's a video game console.

However, given the definition of the word "revolutionary," the Wii/Wiimote qualifies.

You're spending way too much time nitpicking the nuances of a word to see how much discussion, debate, or argument you can generate.

No system has ever done all of the things the Wii can do...if you don't see it as revolutionary, I think you might want to reexamine the word revolutionary.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Wii is the greatest system ever, I have consoles I like better and this is a not a "fanboy" perspective, it's a language perspective...

 

[lilsam]

It may not LOOK revolutionary, but PLAYS it. Its so fun to play with. Dont judge looks but PLAYABILITY. It plays like real life.

 

[chakan]

Yeah it is revolutionary in the sense of the word. There was nothing like the Wii-remote for the c64 or the PS2. And there was no "glove-thing" for the c64either. There have been interactive devices before but they are/were peripherals designed to be used with specific games and had nothing of the sort like gryroscopes in them that can be utilized like the Wii-remote can.

In discussion of the Wii-remote, it's really the control scheme that is being discussed so you should include the whole interface device to the console in the discussion. The revolutionary part is that these are the prime interfaces to the machine. Though we aren't talking about the PS3, the six-axis controls is just another peripheral that happens to be included in the controller. Most developers will still use the same lousy Playstation controller pad for their games (one of the many reasons I wouldn't bother buying a PS3).

I definitely agree that the Wii-remote can be limiting to developers though. Absolutely. It's got a creativity threshold that must be crossed in order to develop for it. Personally that's one of the things that has drawn me to it. That and since it's selling in such huge numbers, devs won't be able to ignore it like I had at first thougt they would.

So I see, as Nintendo predicted, many new games and new franchises that will come out for the Wii because the other way of playing games doesn't always translate over so well to the Wii, hence we all get games with a fresh twist on them. I think in that way it causes revolution. Much less the fact that the Wii Remote and the Nunchuck together are indeed revolutionary primary interfaces for a game console. Nothing else has had this kind of movement and control built-in to a console. Nothing even comes remotely close.

 

[Frogger]

The Wiimote was not based on arcade games, arcade games were there to stimulate one thing, and that is it. The Wiimote is revolutionary, not because it can act in the same way as an arcade game but because it can be expanded by the use of attachments.

Obviously, it has unique features which did not come from the basic NES layout. Nintendo happen to have kept the same buttons through their generations, designing a remote would be hard to make it not resemble the NES controller and make quality games with it.

Although, Nintendo have obviously came with a big downfall because of focusing on motion sensors. Wii Homebrew is an example of this. This still doesn't make it revolutionary.

Yes, the Wiimote needs a bit more work with its abilities and...

Matt Wales of IGN UK highlighted the aiming and precision of Red Steel and stated "Taking down swathes of enemies with nothing more than a twitch of the wrist proves immensely satisfying and, more importantly, incredibly involving."

People are debating over the Wiimote because it is too early for the console to create more games. It's time will come, Nintendo need to do a bit more debugging but you can't deny that the scale of originality is off the charts - I bet you didn't expect them to unveil a remote as their controller.

 

[MaXiMiUS]

Power Glove:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYDuy7wM8Gk

Light Gun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmeeRJxoIcw

Wiimote Accelerometer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Je8khdGUBT4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBsmd-ey4ZU

Wiimote (Sensor Bar Targeting):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAbLvVloFp8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chC-N9cbJYE

I don't know, I consider going from button mashing to this pretty revolutionary. Especially when you look at the previous attempts.

What revolutionary means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary

'The term "revolutionary" is often used in contrast to the term reformist. While a revolutionary is someone who supports abrupt change, a reformist is someone who supports more gradual change.'

If the Wiimote doesn't fit that definition, I don't know what does. At worst, you could consider this evolutionary, but only for Nintendo (because of all the different control schemes they've experimented with in the past).

 

[Dongo]

I was actually hopeing they wouldnt unviel a remote, but thats what happens when you get your hopes up. If you could see me play he wii, its like sad. I just sit on the couch and barley move my hand. After 5 minutes i wish i could just push a button.

 

[LoganSix]

You won't have intense fights? What about Call Of Duty 3?

I think this post with the video proves it all.

In the video, the player can
1 ) shoot a gun
2 ) paddle a boat
3 ) drive a truck
4 ) steer a tank
5 ) aim artillery cannon
6 ) use a stick/rifle to fight
7 ) use hand to hand combat
8 ) wireless control

Add on Wii Sports
9 ) bowling a ball
10 ) using a tennis racket/baseball bat/ golf club
11 ) throwing a ball
12 ) dodging a punch

Now, you might find all of these actions available with some sort of controller found on anything from an arcade game to a console game in the past. You may find 2 of these actions being able to be controlled by a single type of controller. You will not find anywhere in the past (especially not on a Commadore 64) the ability to do all of these actions using the same controller and do these action is close to life like methods.

Read that again "close to life like methods". This is where the Wii mote is revolutionary. It's not just pushing pads or moving joysticks. It is doing actions that mimick real life in order to produce a likewise reaction. If you can't see that this hasn't been done before, then you might as well go back to calling the world flat.

And because the remote makes games easier to play, it has opened up the console to a whole new world of gamers. Which makes the Wii itself, revolutionary in the gaming console industry.