That is eerie. But I remind you, you're comparing it to the NES controller. I'm all for respecting the classics, but there's been decades of controller innovation since then. And from there, the Wii sold its controller on motion, not button input.
You're not looking at the bigger picture here. Yes, of course the Wiimote is the simpler controller, but
that's the entire point of why it exists in the first place. Expanding on current controller set-ups leaves you with an obvious problem: a higher entry-level for people not used to gamepad controls in general,non-gamers. Which in turn, narrows down your consumer base if you're unable to get new people in.
The Wiimote being based on the NES-design, one of the simplest controller designs imaginable, was a very deliberate move. It's also why I think the Wii U controller is fairly silly. They're just rehashing their old prototype controller concepts.
Last time I checked, we don't play games and worry about how much money they made, we play them for their standout qualities. Don't judge a game by the dollar signs it sits upon, judge it by how creative, innovative, and aesthetically appealing it is.
Yes, we play to be entertained. However, you can't discuss the influences of certain games on a particular console without discussing the public reaction and success of said game. Saying
Viva Pinata was truly the standout title that was bright, colorful, innovative, and was a blast to play. It demonstrated truly what the new generation of consoles could do, something that Gears of War could only hope to build upon using Halo's tower of quality rather than actually manifest in its own name.
doesn't even begin to make sense when the game you're comparing it to vastly outdid it. Especially considering Viva Pinata is a first-party game, who also have the added role of
ensuring your hardware sells by being the awesome exclusives everyone brags about.Let's not forget video games are a business. And while it's true that games exist to entertain, which is a subjective thing, let's also not forget that the most important games are the ones that have sold the most. It's not rocket science.
Innovation is meaningless is nobody is there to notice it.
That's just it, the Wii had a small amount of single example mature games with an overwhelming amount of cutesy games. There needs to be a balance, something that Microsoft nor Sony has perfected yet, but there still needs to be a balance.
Which hints more at a third-party problem than the hardware itself, because they clearly didn't openly oppose mature games being made for the system.
And my point is that it was before Kinect and all that stuff came out so it was new a exciting.
The thing is, motion controls are not the sole reason for the Wii's success like everyone tries to make it out to be, otherwise
we'd have seen more buzz surrounding this badboy. Even moreso because the PS2 is the one console that actually sold more than the Wii.
I mean sure, they played a small part no doubt, but both the design of the Wiimote itself and the launch titles (i.e Wii Sports) played quite a significant role people shouldn't forget.
/rantmode2
Speaking of the Wii U and all, anybody else going to watch the conference on tuesday? I figure it'll probably gives us more stuff to go on.
