Just Good Enough to Play

[Game People]

Just Good Enough to Play

How Nintendo rewrote game design history books with the Wii and how Microsoft and Sony may follow suit.

Read Full Article

 

[galaxygamer]

The Wii may be a "good enough system," but the games sure aren't. Even casual gamers want games that are, well, [em]good[/em]. Unfortunately the Wii barely has a large library of good games. Yes, it has a literal metric tonne of shovel-ware, and me-too knock-off games, but a really good quality game is rare on that system. How many of those high-quality games are NOT by Nintendo?

So, maybe Nintendo did rewrite the rules of the video game medium. Unfortunately, those new rules now state that cheap, lazy, uncreative programming is "Just good enough" to keep the average gamer satisfied. About five or 10 years down the road gamers, like me, will wonder where the deep, nuanced, and challenging games went. Then we'll only have to look at the Wii and realize why those games disappeared.

 

[UltimatheChosen]

I understand the point you're trying to make, but I think that there haven't actually been many good examples thus far in the game industry. As a console, there's nothing all that bad about the Wii, but the dearth of good games for it really detracts from the whole presentation. In a way, Sony is making the same mistake: both the PS3 and the Wii don't seem to appeal much to third-party developers.

I think a better example of "just good enough" might be the appeal that older games still hold. Many games (such as Super Metroid) aren't advanced by today's standards, but they're still extremely enjoyable due to well-designed mechanics. Overall, I agree that games need to focus less on the presentation aspect and more on the game... I just disagree with your examples.

 

[The_Deleted]

It's true, the Wii has potential, but by the time it's realised, if ever, gamers will have fucked it off and the non-gamers will be onto the next fad.
Dead Space, Mad World, Zak & Wiki and No More Heroes were all excellent games but just did not get a decent push. If these games were pushed like the shovelware crap we could genuinely have a gaming renaissance. With all kinds of people discovering all kinds of games. But until the non-gamers get past all the Wii Fit, Sports resort or throw away releases it'll will always be a, admittedly very successful and profitable, past time.

 

[tmujir955]

The biggest problem with the Wii is that 3rd party software does not sell. The reason for this is the low hardware the Wii has. It's significantly easier to develop for, and as a result, there's a crapton of shovelware on the Wii. Once you've finished the 1st party titles, finding good 3rd party titles is a pain in the ass. So people like me turn to other systems. I play the Wii, but primarily for the 1st party titles. I do plan to pick up Zack and Wiki soon, though.

 

[BrotherRool]

Note about your conclusion Nintendo didn't "stay focussed on the people who played it's games". They decided that they couldn't compete for those people and went and found some new people instead ^^

 

[Eruanno]

If only there weren't like five Wii games worth playing. There are FAR too many "My Little Pony" and "In Barbie Wonderland"-type of games for the Wii.
Also, please stop wanking off the Mario franchise. Or make something good out of it (I liked Super Mario Galaxy)

 

[Kollega]

Yeah, the problem with Wii is not "just good enough" approach to graphics. It's the "just good enough" approach to games by third-party developers. No More Heroes is a proof that Wii game can be original, good-looking, and have intresting gameplay. But it won't sell very good, because the market is flooded with shovelware.

 

[BrotherRool]

To be honest, Nintendo haven't rewritten game design history books at all. Candystand.com/Kongregate.com browser based games have been offering the exact same games as the Wii has done for decades, just without the benefit of motion control. In fact they have embraced the philosophy even more because browser game developers know they can't afford to raise the stakes and instead have to work to find innovative ways to please the player without fancy graphics OR gimmicky controllers.

I know you love to praise Wii Sports and whats it's done for game design but in truth it's an amalgamation of games on Candystand where they've switched the mouse for a motion sensor (even the movements are similar). It's just that candystand isn't brazen enough to make people pay for it.

Since the games are identical (except teh mosue has to reside on a surface instead of being able to held in the air) Nintendo can't have revolutionised game design. It's purely a marketing exercise and a very good one.

In fact just enough is a perfect phrase for Nintendo's marketing and business plan. Just enough support to get third-party developers, not enough to help them make and publicise good games, just enough good games to please fans, not enough to satisfy them. (Nintendo even seems to release less high quality first-party games a year than MS and Sony (per platform, DS support is pretty good))

 

[veloper]

The biggest question is whether the non-HD crowd will upgrade their wii to the next Nintendo console.

M$ and Sony can atleast rely on the gfx whores to upgrade to a more powerful console in the future. The casual crowd may be content to stick with their wiis for a very long time. They are content with simple gfx now, so why should that change?

 

[Treblaine]

The problem with all that is though the Wii did well it has a shitty line-up of games and for most gamers it has failed them, even on the "just good enough" front.

Wii Sports sold well because it was BUNDLED WITH THE CONSOLE and the console was sold AS A TOY to people who are not gamers but are just getting in on a new fad. The stand alone sales of Wii Sport have been incredibly low, very few people have seen wii-ports on the shelf and bought it.

Wii has a few decent low spec games but then equally PS3 and 360 can do the same with their low spec games that are DOWNLOADED. What you are suggesting is ALREADY being done with XBLA and PSN with games like Geometry Wars, Super Stardust HD, Braid, Flower you don't NEED a weak console to sell games with modest graphics at modest prices.

And it's not like selling a lower power machine is cheaper, Wii currently is selling for the same price as an Xbox 360 Arcade! Nintendo used to be "low performance, budget price" but they have NOT changed with the times, they currently offer the WORST value for money.

"Wii Sports was a system seller because it proved the Wii could deliver simple, accessible gameplay."

Bullshit. What you just described is not "Gameplay" but a TOY, barely a step up from "ball in a cup", what Nintendo have shown is how to sell a toy to the mass market and NOT a true gaming platform. It's just a plaything, suitable to infants who are learning their motor control or feckless adults who want something to play around with and don't want any real challenge or competition.

Boom Blox sold terribly, global sales after almost 2 years are barely 1 million to spite how large the install base of the Wii is. Now this is one of the top rated exclusive games on the Wii yet in 87 weeks barely 2% of owners bothered to pick it up. This just shows that for the majority of people who bought the Wii they use it AS A TOY. They play the bundled game that came with it and pretty much that's it.

Now don't get me wrong, I have a LOT of faith in the mantra of "moderate graphic, moderate price, great gameplay" and PC has had this for years and the console are now getting it with their XBLA and PSN games not just of new games but re release of old games that have low graphics but great gameplay.

I just find that the Wii is a TERRIBLE example of that, as it just sold itself as a Toy which is NOT what "just good enough" graphics games are supposed to be about.

 

[Cerity]

Nintendo's intent with this system is simply ingenious. It has opened up gaming as a platform for other things. It is reminiscent of the old Family game night where you have friends over on a Friday or even Sunday night to cook a great dinner and then play a board game where all involved have fun. It brings together all ages as well as all walks of life. I know most people can not think of the business side of what Nintendo has done, but I know the market is still watching the wii and the DS stomp the x-box and the PS in combined sales. You can always find a better graphic machine or a high resolution game. It's the memories the wii is creating with families that is selling it so well. I know watching my own mother (48 in age) play her first video game and enjoy it was a revelation for me. She no longer razzes me when I am game testing or writing articles for video games, or when I sell my product. Since I work for a retailer who sells all sort of games and gamer tools.

I believe the Wii is making gaming a life tool and not just a fad, or an underground cult club. The game/computer programmers, creative directors, artists, testers, and everyone else in the industry is experiencing a golden age in their industry thanks to some of the doors the Wii has opened up. Yes this may just be my opinion, but this article certainly shows it is a shared one. Long live Mario and Link!!!

 

[The_Deleted]

I have no issue with the graphics. The art design of the games I mentioned more than compensates for any so called realism.

 

[The Random One]

I agree entirely with this article. Truth is, as complexity grows, it becomes more and more expensive to model a game with the quality of graphics that the consoles demand, and therefore gamers expect. Because of that, gamers will become more and more make-or-break, and designers will have to play cautiously, so innovation will be stifled. This is already starting to happen and will get worse with each new generation. Until the 'good enough' line of thought has more widespread adoption, game design will march to its doom.

Seriously, games now are so beautiful I don't even bat an eye. I have a 360 and spent the Christmas holiday playing Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. After you arrive at a point in which people look like people, cars look like cars and guns look like guns, any new graphical development is unnecessary and worth only a single moment of eye candy.

 

[Wastrel5]

The problem with all that is though the Wii did well it has a shitty line-up of games and for most gamers it has failed them, even on the "just good enough" front.

Wii Sports sold well because it was BUNDLED WITH THE CONSOLE and the console was sold AS A TOY to people who are not gamers but are just getting in on a new fad. The stand alone sales of Wii Sport have been incredibly low, very few people have seen wii-ports on the shelf and bought it.

"Wii Sports was a system seller because it proved the Wii could deliver simple, accessible gameplay."

Bullshit. What you just described is not "Gameplay" but a TOY, barely a step up from "ball in a cup", what Nintendo have shown is how to sell a toy to the mass market and NOT a true gaming platform. It's just a plaything, suitable to infants who are learning their motor control or feckless adults who want something to play around with and don't want any real challenge or competition.

Boom Blox sold terribly, global sales after almost 2 years are barely 1 million to spite how large the install base of the Wii is. Now this is one of the top rated exclusive games on the Wii yet in 87 weeks barely 2% of owners bothered to pick it up. This just shows that for the majority of people who bought the Wii they use it AS A TOY. They play the bundled game that came with it and pretty much that's it.

What's wrong with seeing the Wii AS A TOY? Its opening gaming up to a much larger consumer base than any previous console has EVER done before. So what if Granny and Grandpa view it as a TOY or soccer Mommy Susi uses it to do something about those TERRIBLE stretch marks she so despises. The Wii changed everything about videogames in this console generation and they did by focussing on accessibility rather than Pixel Shader 3.0.

And what do you have against feckless adults huh? There are some, believe it or not, that don't want to vegetate on a sofa whilst taking a drag and uttering racial slurs into a crappy Microsoft headset. Some people play games, you know, FOR FUN. That might not mean they want to finish Modern Warfare 2 on Veteran to fellate their e-penis. It might mean they enjoy sociable games that involve physically interacting with what is going on the screen. Or it might mean that ALL casual gamers HATE hardcore gamers as much as the JETS hate the SHARKS, who knows?

Yeah, 3rd-party developers dropped the ball in terms of figuring the market out and making games that 98% of Wii owners would want to buy. But considering that 98% of Wii owners are cross-generational and have a variety of lifestyles that range from worrying about a mortgage, whether or not they?re gonna have SPAGHETTI hoops for tea, or what DENTURE cleaner to use ? you really can?t expect a procession of games to hit all those demographics.

In any case, Nintendo has made enough money to buy Purgatory by having the 'just good enough' philosophy well and truly down to an art. ACCESSIBILITY reigns supreme in the wider non-hardcore market and no-one, NO-ONE has done that better than Nintendo. Once that market has dried up like a spent cow's teat they'll just go back to their roots, pump out the old traditional classics and start all over again. It's just like the storyline in Mass Effect, except with money instead of ultra-trillions of human and alien lives at stake. Sadly though, we'll never see an Asari side-boob on the Wii.

And I'm SPENT.

 

[GeneralGrant]

Insulting or praising the Wii is a waste of time because it was a huge success for Nintendo-it did something new that attracted a lot of people who don't normally consider games to buy it. I'm not sure why we still have these arguments about which console is the best, they all succeeded to varying degrees. I'm more interested to see what's coming when new consoles come out-these "next gen" consoles are not next gen anymore, they've been out for years.

 

[StriderShinryu]

The biggest question is whether the non-HD crowd will upgrade their wii to the next Nintendo console.

M$ and Sony can atleast rely on the gfx whores to upgrade to a more powerful console in the future. The casual crowd may be content to stick with their wiis for a very long time. They are content with simple gfx now, so why should that change?

I think this is a very interesting point. Yes, everyone and their dog is buying a Wii now but what will happen with the next N console, especially if it's nothing but an upgrade of their current one? This will be the true question given that Sony and MS will also have the gimmick of motion control plus more value in their overall package. Will the "non-gamers" bother upgrading at all? Will those who have realized they quite like gaming stick with N or graduate to a more well rounded gaming system?

 

[thenumberthirteen]

"Good enough" isn't. A Wii with the latest computing capabilities is better than one without.

Remember that a powerful CPU, etc. doesn't just mean good graphics. It gives the developer the memory and the speed for good AI, interesting game mechanics, better multiplayer, Internet based functions such as streaming movies, the list goes on.

Remember that all Computers, given limitless memory, can preform the same functions. How fast it can do these things affects the practicalities of the feature (something that is even more important in real time gaming).

People defend the Wii's lack of power because they say "it's not all about the graphics". Has the progression of games consoles from the Odyssey to the PS3 been solely graphical? No.

 

[Caliostro]

Sorry, but I'm going to have to go against this entire article. In particular to...

"just good enough"

... This.

I abhor mediocrity. There's this cult of the mediocre being formed in our society, and if there's one thing life taught me is that "just good enough" is neither truly "good" or truly "enough".

If we can do better, why not? Why strive for the acceptable when we can reach excellence?

I do understand the basic principle of what you're implying, at this day and age it's not longer justifiable to spend an extra 30 million in development just for another level of anti-aliasing or anisotropic filtering. It's just redundant.

However, that's not "being just good enough", that's avoiding overkill. There's nothing wrong with making graphics good, with making a visually interesting experience. Companies just need to come to terms with the fact that we really have gone way past the point of diminishing returns when it comes to graphics, and that we shift some of the focus from improving graphics into improving everything else.

And quite honestly, Nintendo are the last people I'd want ushering in that new era... They epitomize the idea "just good enough... to sell". See, Nintendo doesn't strive for good, it strives for good enough to sell. Mediocrity. Most of the time visual, artistic and gameplay wise. They're the 50 cents, the Kanye West, the MTV of gaming. They cater to people with more money than common sense, that'll buy anything shiny or gimmicky enough to get their attention. Like MTV does to "music".

In sum, focusing less on graphics is good. Aiming for mediocrity like Nintendo does will be the death of gaming.

 

[BrotherRool]

Some people in this thread need a soapbox and a medal. And I agree how can the Wii Sport count as a seller? It's just the game bundled with the Wii. It's like calling the Microsoft headset a stroke of technological genius because 39 million 360 users got one with the console.

And as people have said CPU doesn't equal graphics. Wii games have less enemies because they can't process them, less interesting systems because they can't process them, less really huge sandboxes because they can't process them, no 256 player online shooters. No Mass Effect. It's not bad and dev.s can make do with less but why should I be satisfied by that? By making their games less good Nintendo haven't improved the quality of what I receive in any way. If you were to offer me all the Sony first party exclusives as opposed to the Nintendo ones, where's the effin' contest?

inFamous, Uncharted 1,2. Heavy Rain, Demon Souls, Killzone 2, Motorstorm, Motor Storm: Pacific Rift, God of War 3, White Knight Chronicles, Valkyria Chronicles, Resistance 2. Modnation Racers. Even the platform genre is smashed by Little Big Planet. Flower, Fat Princess, flow, Pixel Junk Shooter, Pixel Junk Eden. 3Dot RPG Hero.

And you say we're getting a better, more player tailored games with Nintendo? That's crud. Demon Souls, Heavy Rain, Little Big Planet, ModNation Racers, Valkyria Chronicles. Sony have done far more to revolutionise games and create whole new experiences for their users. The same for Microsoft. If you want the perfect player tailored experience, play Uncharted 2.

Since the PSN can bring more quality to bare than everything but the very best and very most unfrequent of Nintendo's releases you're going to have to change the definition of quality. Obviously, this is the old fashioned idea of games. Games that thrill, exhilarate, plug you into a whole new world and let you go out and explore. Games that move you and take you on a journey are being revolutionised by browser based mini games.

And yes that has interested all sorts of new people into games, but they aren't real games. They don't hiijack your brain and take you on a ride. If Nintendo is leading the way in the new era of gaming Aeris will never die again, we'll never have the thrill of slowly struggling to become a Sith Lord and becoming so twisted that we kill of those who supported us. Our brains will never be set pumping our minds will never be set free. We'll never sit tensely on our seats as we're stalked by a Black Phantom. We'll never read books on the games we play.

You say Nintendo rewrote game design with their packaged browser games. I say it was an exercise in marketing. I hope for gamings sake you're wrong. Whats the point of introducing everyone to our hobby if we have to destroy what;s brilliant about it in the process? I'd prefer to be a pariah and have the buzz of a game in my head hours after I've completed it than to be one of everyone and put down the game at the same time as I put down my controller.