Has Nintendo Given Up on Motion Controls?

[HG Revolution]

Wii Sports controlled amazingly, WarioWare was a lot of fun, and Metroid Prime 3 was everything I hoped for in a Wii game, but since then, it seems Nintendo's abandoning trying to do things with motion-sensing. Galaxy satisfyingly mixed some motion controls with traditional gameplay, something I'd be fine with being the norm, but their next three big releases after Galaxy have got me wondering. Brawl always made sense as being controlled traditionally, so that's one thing. But MarioKart's option of using the Wiimote is supposedly weaker than Excite Truck, a game which game out at launch. And then comes WiiFit, adding a new peripheral altogether which will probably be perfect for it but will be likely be abandoned shortly after that. Did Metroid's disappointing sales hurt the Wii's main selling point, or did it just become too difficult to make satisfying motion-based games?

[Punisher]

One can only hope that they are. Metroid Prime 3 and Sonic and the Secret Rings were both ruined by adding motion based wacky controls.

[The Falcon]

prime 3 handled amazingly, in my opinion. it's just how people tend to view it. mario kart will be using motion tilt for controlling the karts, but in an ign interview, the producer of the game even said players who wish to be competitive should use the gamecube controller or the classic controller

[Marinite]

Wii Sports controlled amazingly, WarioWare was a lot of fun, and Metroid Prime 3 was everything I hoped for in a Wii game, but since then, it seems Nintendo's abandoning trying to do things with motion-sensing. Galaxy satisfyingly mixed some motion controls with traditional gameplay, something I'd be fine with being the norm, but their next three big releases after Galaxy have got me wondering. Brawl always made sense as being controlled traditionally, so that's one thing. But MarioKart's option of using the Wiimote is supposedly weaker than Excite Truck, a game which game out at launch. And then comes WiiFit, adding a new peripheral altogether which will probably be perfect for it but will be likely be abandoned shortly after that. Did Metroid's disappointing sales hurt the Wii's main selling point, or did it just become too difficult to make satisfying motion-based games?

Motion controls only work for some games, not all, so billing Wii's main gimmick as a motion control controller is pretty dubious. It should have been an add on controller, or they should have released two controllers: one for motion control stuff like WiiSports, Corruption, Raveman, and WiiPlay, and another for games that don't utilize motion control aside from gimmicky wiggling (ports, everything else) so developers don't feel obligated to put tacked-on motion controls for the sake that its on the Wii (something like the classic controller, only with actual function for Wii games and not just VC)

[turbomog007]

mario galaxies should be the only proof that anyone needs that motion controls are unnecessary and just make an artificial difficulty barrier. They could have easily mapped the spin attack to a button but they decided to use the motion controls for it. Attack and hope become the motto of that game.

[tb4000]

Most people's gripes were that "when I play a game, I don't want to move, I want to sit on my ass and just use my thumbs." Me personally, I don't mind having to swing the wii-mote as a sword during No More Heroes or shaking it during Mario Galaxy, I think it's fun, and doesn't get old. And while that concept does seem geared more towards kids, I've seen plenty an adult get hooked as well, but I do think if it ain't needed, don't tack it on to a game. Games involving melee weapons and shooting do need the movements though.

[Eddy]

How many DS games does Nintendo make that really make use of the whole touching thing? Yeah, not many. I expect the same to happen with the Wii. But, as long as the games are fun, it really doesn't matter, does it?

[Yash]

Brawl doesn't support extensive motion sensing because it's not supposed to. There's no sense in adding waggle to a game that plays best on a GameCube controller. In fact, I remember they were going to try having the player shake the remote to do a Smash attack, and decided it was stupid.

I've heard from most sources that the Wii Wheel controls surprisingly well for Mario Kart. Also, it's apparently less convenient to do tricks on a GameCube or classic controller, but I'll judge that when I play the game.

The balance board has a lot of potential. I'd be surprised if EA or Activision doesn't make a Skate/Tony Hawk game for it.

Someone brought up Sonic being "ruined" by motion sensing. The game controlled fine, the only problem was that you had to level up in order for it to do so. I'm not sure who came up with the idea that Sonic can't go at his maximum speed or only collect a certain amount of rings until you do such and such, but they're probably the same genius who decided Shadow should have a gun.

[GWOtaku]

Geez, I love the motion controls in Mario and Zelda. Yes, the spinning and all the rest does immerse me more into Mario Galaxy. I like seeing Link swing his sword with a flick of my wrist, and I love the precise aim and control I have when shooting arrows. I HATE having to use joysticks to aim in Halo. That's no doubt because I hardly play FPS games and am a horrible newbie when it comes to Halo, but still.

I'd say even some third party games have done a decent job; One Piece Unlimited Adventure has a fine range of moves that you can do with a combination of wiimote movement and button pushing.

Honestly, I'm not a fan of it all the time. For the DS, I don't buy games that force me to use the stylus. I play it when I'm traveling and its more convenient to just push buttons as I walk, for instance. Maybe I'm missing out, but that's my thing.

Motion controls have their place, sometimes they work out great and sometimes you don't need them. I was incredulous when Gamespot whined that you couldn't use the wiimote to point at the grid-based overworld map in the strategy RPG Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn. Sure, they COULD have done that, but what's the point? It doesn't add to gameplay, it would have been tiring and folks would've gone back to using a control pad to navigate the map anyway.

[HellCat]

I like motion control. Sure, it makes buggy controls on some games. But it puts you more into the game then a classic controller. It's also healthier. Part of why I love Wii Sports is I know I'm geting some form of actual exercise from playing it. I know I've developed stronger arm muscles certainly.

[Zach]

Basing an entire console around a gimmick that only works with some types of games proves that the Wii is a $250 Gamecube with a peripheral.

[Icer]

The motion controls are good, but not when they get shoe-horned into certain games that didn't need it. I like games like No More Heroes that makes a little use out of it, enough to get you to feel like part of the action but not enough to detract from the action itself. However certain games feel much too forced and then detract from the overall experience.

Less is more in other words

[Eddy]

Basing an entire console around a gimmick that only works with some types of games proves that the Wii is a $250 Gamecube with a peripheral.
And the PS3 is a $500 PS2 with prettier graphics and Blu-Ray.

I'm really kind of sick of everyone calling the Wii a GameCube because, while not as powerful as the 360 or PS3, Super Mario Galaxy and Brawl still show that the Wii can make games look damn good. And how quickly everyone forgets about the Virtual Console, something the GameCube didn't have.

[sdp]

Just like the DS and its stylus not every game has to use "waggle". It doesn't have to be incorporated ine very game. Mario Galaxy proves how just a bit motion sensing is very rewarding. You could have mapped it into a button but that would have not been as fun. The only reason the Wii feels more like a "Gamecube 1.1" is because third parties are cashing in by making PS2/Wii games as a one console instead of making them for the Wii specifically. Nintendo has not given up on motion controls at all I don't see how you would get that idea. What I'm disappointed is how third parties just cramming it in a game. Just a simple shake can make a game much better. making you have to do stuff like Wii Sports is just not necessary for EVERY game.

[Zach]

And the PS3 is a $500 PS2 with prettier graphics and Blu-Ray.

I'm really kind of sick of everyone calling the Wii a GameCube because, while not as powerful as the 360 or PS3, Super Mario Galaxy and Brawl still show that the Wii can make games look damn good. And how quickly everyone forgets about the Virtual Console, something the GameCube didn't have.

The PS3 is a more powerful console capable of far more advanced visuals and A.I. while the Wii is essentially just a Gamecube with a peripheral. Nintendo is charging $250 for a remote.

As for the Virtual Console, it was a nice idea but was poorly executed.

[Desensitized]

I'm still happy with my Wii60 combo, even if the third parties just aren't trying that hard so far I'm enjoying the Wii more than the Gamecube.

[Sketch]

The PS3 is a more powerful console capable of far more advanced visuals and A.I. while the Wii is essentially just a Gamecube with a peripheral. Nintendo is charging $250 for a remote.

As for the Virtual Console, it was a nice idea but was poorly executed.

Funny, I still see no reason to buy a PS3 then to get a decently priced Blu-Ray player.

You couldn't make a game look as good as Mario Galaxy on the Gamecube but that's besides the point. The games are fun. Something the PS3 lacks and something the 360 only accomplishes because it has a ton of titles to play while a lot of them aren't even worth playing (now mind you I do consider the Wii to have too much shovelware but every console does and always will given the market).

Asside from cheaper pricing (and besides overpricing common N64 games I don't see another issue with that pricing) what could make the VC better? They're near exact ports. If you want them to add things then it kind of defeats the purpose of preserving what those games were. Not to say I don't like enhanced ports but given the opportunity to nab Kid Icarus for 5 bucks and always have it on hand VS paying over 20 for it and only being able to play it on my broken down NES which I can barely get to work anymore, I'd choose the later. Or perhaps you mean to say they don't offer enough of the good titles. That much I can agree on and I also think 2 games a week is pathetic but more good games will come and plenty of good ones are available including ones that were never released in the US prior to the VC.

What exactly are you complaining about? It's the cheapest of the 3 systems. It's not really meant to best them in graphical prowess. All that matters is if the games are good. And that's left up to the individual. If you don't like them, that's your business. But plenty of people do like them.

[Mynd Hed]

Let's try to keep this on-topic; this isn't the thread for a PS3 vs. Wii debate.

[Desensitized]

The problem isn't the motion controls, it's that the good games just aren't selling. WiiPlay sold more than almost any other game on the Wii, and that's all about motion controls despite it's shoddy quality.

I don't see why they'd shy away from it, considering WiiPlay type games sell more than any other game. Even the ones on their own system. WiiFit will probably sell too. So I'm not exactly surprised they tried cramming motion controls into Mario Kart. Whether they work or not, it'll probably sell.

[GWOtaku]

The problem isn't the motion controls, it's that the good games just aren't selling. WiiPlay sold more than almost any other game on the Wii, and that's all about motion controls despite it's shoddy quality.

I don't see why they'd shy away from it, considering WiiPlay type games sell more than any other game. Even the ones on their own system. WiiFit will probably sell too. So I'm not exactly surprised they tried cramming motion controls into Mario Kart. Whether they work or not, it'll probably sell.

Wii Play is kind of deceptive though, considering that most people probably buy it for the extra Wiimote controller like I did. Wiiplay's little games aren't possibly worth the price on their own.

[The Avatar]

The Wii shouldn't be based entirely on the motion controls. The games should be good in their own right. The motion controls should be their simply to enhance some of the games that could be improved by them. Sure, a game or two that is based entirely on the motion controls, such as Wii Sports and Wii Play, is fine. But that shouldn't be all of the games. Not all games have a use for the motion controls.

I think a good model of how games can use the motion controls is Super Mario Galaxy. That game was able to add the motion controls to the game and mix them with traditional game-play, without having the motion controls seemed tacked-on.

[Zach]

Funny, I still see no reason to buy a PS3 then to get a decently priced Blu-Ray player.

I agree. The PS3 isn't worth it right now, but that's because there aren't enough good games. June will be the month of the PS3, and Metal Gear will hit and the system will finally be worth the money.

You couldn't make a game look as good as Mario Galaxy on the Gamecube but that's besides the point. The games are fun. Something the PS3 lacks and something the 360 only accomplishes because it has a ton of titles to play while a lot of them aren't even worth playing (now mind you I do consider the Wii to have too much shovelware but every console does and always will given the market).Most of the quality Wii games are first-party. This has been the case since the N64, but that doesn't make it any more acceptable that Nintendo is the only company making good games for their consoles. Good third-party support is a must for consoles. Considering this, it's easy to see why the 360 has the best and most varied game library out there.

Or perhaps you mean to say they don't offer enough of the good titles. That much I can agree on and I also think 2 games a week is pathetic but more good games will come and plenty of good ones are available including ones that were never released in the US prior to the VC.This is what I'm speaking of. The Virtual Console is great way to preserve classic games for younger generations of gamers, but Nintendo hasn't done a very good job of getting titles on there. The games that need to be there eventually will arrive, but it'd be nice if more games would be released each week.

What exactly are you complaining about? It's the cheapest of the 3 systems. It's not really meant to best them in graphical prowess. All that matters is if the games are good. And that's left up to the individual. If you don't like them, that's your business. But plenty of people do like them.

My problem is that Nintendo is charging $250 for a controller that doesn't work well with many types of games. While it works well for shooters and so forth, it does nothing to improve games like Mario and Zelda. Waggle is just sophisticated button-mashing. That's not to say that they aren't fun (Galaxy was my favorite game of last year), but it's silly to suggest that most games wouldn't be as fun with a regular gamepad.

[mookie75]

I agree. The PS3 isn't worth it right now, but that's because there aren't enough good games. June will be the month of the PS3, and Metal Gear will hit and the system will finally be worth the money.


I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that MGS4 will make the system worth the money. I love the MGS series as much as the next fan, and I'm sure that MGS4 will sell many, many copies around the world, but I also know that within a few days of its release many people will have already beaten it. And within a couple weeks after that, many will have already moved on and will be clamoring for the next big PS3 game.

Brawl is a great example of this phenomenon. How long had people been hyped about that game before it finally came out? I've lost track of exactly how long it's been, but I do know that some people are already getting tired of it and it's been out for less than a month (just go over to the Brawl threads to see examples of this). It's still a great game, I'm sure, but even the blockbuster games come and go in the blink of an eye nowadays.

Long gone are the days when gamers were content to "beat" the same game over and over for weeks on end. Now we buy the game, beat it in a couple days to a couple weeks (depending on the type of game) and instantly demand another great game to entertain us. I think I've said this on this board before, but I still remember when we first got our original NES and all my brother and I had to do was beat Super Mario Bros. over and over for several months. And I can honestly say that it never got old.

I imagine MGS4 will sell more than a few new PS3 consoles, but it won't be long before the game will be sitting on the shelves and people will still be saying "Why doesn't the PS3 have more 'good' games?" And for the record, I've played and enjoyed all the MGS games up to this point, but I've drawn the line with buying a $500 console to play the next installment. It's not even close to being worth that kind of money to me. Perhaps in 15 years if the console is down to $100, the game is down to $20, and the overall library for the PS3 has improved a great deal, I might consider it.


On topic: I think the better question to ask is "Will more third parties start seriously trying to make games with good motion controls?" I don't think Nintendo has been slacking in this area since the company itself has released several games on the Wii that -- from what I hear -- make good to excellent use of the motion controls. I would expect as much considering that they designed the console in the first place. There have been some good third party titles as well, but we could see many more if those companies put forth a little more effort.

[Sketch]

Games are fun either way. But I still dissagree that Wii is nothing more than a GCN with a perheral. The graphic power isn't immense but its a good step up from GCN's best graphics. And even if most of the games aren't a huge step up a lot of perheral's run 20-30 bucks on new systems right? Sometimes up to 50 for the fancy ones. So at worst you have a brand new GCN model with a perheral and wouldn't that come to about 250 bucks given the pricing system companies have for new versions of old technology? It'd be at least 200. That extra 50 comes in when you factor in all the things Wii can do that GCN can't. Such as the Wifi, the VC, the harddrive (albiet small), the user profiles and of course the motion sensor technology.

But if it comes down to graphis... Graphic wise Mario Sunshine looks like crap compared to Mario Galaxy. With the exception of Kirby's design (which didn't change at all) and the Melee levels, Brawl is much prettier than Melee and considerably more detailed.

The problem lies with the 3rd party developers that don't use Wii's potential. Instead they make ports of PS2 games which obviously wouldn't have use for the motion controls (in at least most cases). Despite that I think 3rd party developers are already showing a lot more love towards Wii than Gamecube. And that's simply because the PS2 has finally started to die out and the Wii is selling incredibly well which makes third party developers more interested in making games for it.

There still isn't enough third party support and that puts it behind the 360 in the number of quality games but Wii is getting the 3rd party support the GCN never could have hoped for. That bodes well for Nintendo. But it's no surprise their own games still sell better they're long standing franchises which some people will buy out of meer association. But also, their own games make the best use of their technology more times than not. That includes the motion sensor of course.

[Desensitized]

Actually, I think the Melee levels look better in Brawl. Melee had this weird sheen to it that annoyed me to no end, but Brawl doesn't have it anymore.

[Eddy]

It's not Nintendo's fault a lot of the motion controls don't work very well. Blame the lazy third parties that think porting a two year old PS2 game with added waggle features makes the game good.

This isn't to say all third party support is bad. No More Heroes is one of the best games on the Wii right now and makes great use of the controls, Zack & Wiki is fun point and click adventure, and the Wii version of Resident Evil 4 is the best version with the tightest and most responsive controls making it really feel like RE4 was made for the Wii.

[Dark Fact]

My problem is that Nintendo is charging $250 for a controller that doesn't work well with many types of games. While it works well for shooters and so forth, it does nothing to improve games like Mario and Zelda. Waggle is just sophisticated button-mashing. That's not to say that they aren't fun (Galaxy was my favorite game of last year), but it's silly to suggest that most games wouldn't be as fun with a regular gamepad.
So what would you rather have the Nintendo Wii be? Just another Gamecube with a better processor? Sorry bud, but Nintendo wasn't going to settle for third place again. If Nintendo can find ways to be innovative to keep the game industry interesting, more power to them.
Brawl is a great example of this phenomenon. How long had people been hyped about that game before it finally came out? I've lost track of exactly how long it's been, but I do know that some people are already getting tired of it and it's been out for less than a month (just go over to the Brawl threads to see examples of this). It's still a great game, I'm sure, but even the blockbuster games come and go in the blink of an eye nowadays.

Long gone are the days when gamers were content to "beat" the same game over and over for weeks on end. Now we buy the game, beat it in a couple days to a couple weeks (depending on the type of game) and instantly demand another great game to entertain us. I think I've said this on this board before, but I still remember when we first got our original NES and all my brother and I had to do was beat Super Mario Bros. over and over for several months. And I can honestly say that it never got old.
As someone who wants to get into the game developing industry, I can't help but feel sad at this kind of news. Have we as gamers become so asinine that we have to treat games as disposable material?

Take a look back at the early to mid 90's where gamers valued their time with games. People then knew what games were important to them and what weren't. Nowadays, it's just not the same.

Sorry, but if I'm going to start making games, I want to make sure that the people play them would find them worth their time and have a crack at it every now and then like the good ol sprite games of yore. I sure hope Japan doesn't share this same sentiment about treating games as disposable material as American gamers do. :sad:

[Mikintosh]

Super Mario Galaxy hit a great middle point between motion-based and standard controls in a way that feels completely natural, something a lot of people making games for the Wii haven't hit upon yet. Meanwhile, the games that don't use much motion control are still damn good, so why complain?

[Punisher]

This isn't to say all third party support is bad. No More Heroes is one of the best games on the Wii right now and makes great use of the controls, Zack & Wiki is fun point and click adventure, and the Wii version of Resident Evil 4 is the best version with the tightest and most responsive controls making it really feel like RE4 was made for the Wii.I completely disagree with that part about RE4. I played it for the Wii and controlling it was so frustrating that it became unbearable before I even got through the village, and given the choice I'd choose the Gamecube version over it anyday. This is my huge gripe with Wii games, adding odd control schemes to games that simply don't need it. Imagine if you had to swing the Wiimote to make a smash attack on Brawl. Would people be praising the Wii contoller then?

[Marinite]

It's not Nintendo's fault a lot of the motion controls don't work very well. Blame the lazy third parties that think porting a two year old PS2 game with added waggle features makes the game good.

This isn't to say all third party support is bad. No More Heroes is one of the best games on the Wii right now and makes great use of the controls, Zack & Wiki is fun point and click adventure, and the Wii version of Resident Evil 4 is the best version with the tightest and most responsive controls making it really feel like RE4 was made for the Wii.Nintendo's guilty of it as well, they basically delayed Twilight Princess (originally a Gamecube game) so they could have a game people would buy for the Wii launch. Same thing with Super Paper Mario (original Gamecube game, stuck on some gimmicky motion controls and labeled it a Wii game, but this one never got a GCN release) I also am In the group that say the motion controls for Galaxy are tacked on. There's no reason why the spinning move couldn't have just been a simple button press, like Link swinging his sword in TP by waving the remote, it's just there to give the illusion that you need the Wiimote.

Also, the most acclaimed non-Mii-based game that incorporates the motion controls is Metroid Prime 3, which is a third-party game, so it's not a third-party thing, really.

I sure hope Japan doesn't share this same sentiment about treating games as disposable material as American gamers do. :sad: Japan actually has a more healthy/active trade-in culture than America, despite Gamestop's relentless push on the subject; that's why there's quite a few re-releases (like KH Final Mix), since most gamers no longer have the original game and have no problem buying it again to play it. So you'd probably be even more disappointed with them.

Back in the SNES days, there were plenty of good gamings coming out, so people were constantly happy. If all you buy the system for is one game (Brawl for Wii, MGS4 for PS3) then it's hardly a good value.

[Zach]

Nintendo's guilty of it as well, they basically delayed Twilight Princess (originally a Gamecube game) so they could have a game people would buy for the Wii launch. Same thing with Super Paper Mario (original Gamecube game, stuck on some gimmicky motion controls and labeled it a Wii game, but this one never got a GCN release) I also am In the group that say the motion controls for Galaxy are tacked on. There's no reason why the spinning move couldn't have just been a simple button press, like Link swinging his sword in TP by waving the remote, it's just there to give the illusion that you need the Wiimote.

Exactly, Nintendo isn't doing anything but shoehorning Wii controls onto games that need to be on a regular gamepad. I like the idea of the controller, but it shouldn't be the sole input device for a console.

[Dark Fact]

Also, the most acclaimed non-Mii-based game that incorporates the motion controls is Metroid Prime 3, which is a third-party game, so it's not a third-party thing, really.
Doesn't this company make games only for Nintendo? If they do, then they are a second-party developer, not third.

[Jave]

Doesn't this company make games only for Nintendo? If they do, then they are a second-party developer, not third.Yeah, it's a company Nintendo specifically hires for the Metroid Games. The game was made in collaboration with Nintendo (Retro Studios says so in his website), thus making it 2nd Party. It's the same case with Game Freak (Pokemon) and Intelligent Systems (Fire Emblem & Advance Wars)

[Marinite]

Doesn't this company make games only for Nintendo? If they do, then they are a second-party developer, not third.

Yeah, it's a company Nintendo specifically hires for the Metroid Games. The game was made in collaboration with Nintendo (Retro Studios says so in his website), thus making it 2nd Party. It's the same case with Game Freak (Pokemon) and Intelligent Systems (Fire Emblem & Advance Wars) I've always wondered what a 2nd party developer would be, that makes sense, I guess. Oh well, I was mainly pointing out Nintendo studios themselves didn't develop the game, like they do Mario, Zelda, and WiiVerb series.

[SirLemming]

And the PS3 is a $500 PS2 with prettier graphics and Blu-Ray.
No, it's a valid criticism. Aside from the remote, Wii's improvements over Gamecube are marginal at best, whereas PS3 is TONS more powerful than PS2, as well as being fully HD and a vehicle for Blu-Ray. That's definitely enough to justify a new system. If Wii didn't have the Wiimote, it would barely seem better than a Gamecube, so I think it's fair to emphasize the importance of motion controls.

Now, there ARE other nice things about Wii. The Miis, Virtual Console, and general online functionality are probably the main ones, along with the (partial) HD support. Next to the difference between PS2 and PS3, though, or the (somewhat smaller) difference between Xbox and Xbox 360, it does seem a bit lacking. It's also a much less drastic technological difference than the difference between Game Boy Advance and DS. The motion controls are definitely the key here.

As with the DS, Nintendo sort of started out saying "this is actually a companion system, it doesn't have to replace the previous one" but of course once it's successful, that all goes out the window. If Wii is more popular than Gamecube, games will come out for it whether they need Wii's extra features or not. Gamecube owners are left in the dust. Of course, if the same companies did still make games for Gamecube, the likely reaction would be "Why not make it for Wii and have it look slightly better and take advantage of the system's popularity?" So... I don't really know what should be done. It's really just inevitable that games will be made for the most popular systems.



Without taking marketing concerns into account, I sort of feel that the Wii should have a smaller library than other consoles. But no businessman in his right mind would set out to achieve that goal. So I guess the only thing to take out of this is that game companies should accept this inevitable outcome and make games for Wii regardless of whether or not they can use the motion controls really well, and avoid tacking motion controls on just for the heck of it. That's the lesson Konami learned with the Castlevania series. The first one for DS had a pointless "spellcasting" system where you drew magic runes with the stylus; the second one simply took advantage of the touch screen in a few places, such as sending your partner to a place on the screen or directing a few projectile attacks.

[Eddy]

The Wii is more powerful than the GameCube than people give it credit for. The Wii's processor runs at 729 MHz compared to the GameCube's 485 MHz. Wii has 88 MB of RAM whereas the GameCube had 24. Wii's video card has 88 MB and the GameCube has 16.

And compare Melee to Brawl and tell me Brawl doesn't look a lot better than Melee. Or compare Galaxy to Sunshine. The change isn't as significant as the PS2 to PS3 or Xbox to 360, but it's there.

And complain all you want about how the Wii is a repackaged GameCube but, from a business standpoint, Nintendo had no choice but to release a new console. The GameCube was dying and fast. It's last year on the market was nothing short of pathetic. Sure, it's not as powerful as the others, but that makes it easy to be the cheapest console on the market so it's affordable to the average person.

[Sketch]

Whether you believe they're shoehorned or not, the majority of the Wii buys do like those controls and it's one of the reasons why it sells so well. I mean really, the GCN didn't sell well at all so if the Wii is nothing more than a GCN with a remote then what is it selling for? One would assume it's the remote. So why does that tick off so many of you? If you don't like it then don't buy it.

A lot of GCN games were ported or pushed to Wii for the simple fact that the GCN was dead. Super Paper Mario sold better on the Wii then it would have on the GCN. That's what matters to Nintendo's wallet. It's good business. And in the reguards to Twilight Princess, if you didn't want to the Wii controls then you can play the GCN one either on a GCN or the Wii (since the GCN game plays on Wii too obviously).

They don't over do it on the motion controls. If that were true then Smash Bros. would be motion control based as well. They use it where it seems sensible. Wario Ware, Metroid Prime and Mario Kart lend themselves to motion controls. Zelda is debatable but I like being able to slash with my hand motions.

However there is a dark side to motion controls and I can clearly see it. Some games do use them poorly. I just played TMNT for Wii and the motion controls in that are incredibly dissorienting and don't react well. It does have an artificial challenge factor to it and the GCN version of that game was frustraiting enough as it is so that makes it even less bareable.

I don't think a few games either using them poorly or barely using them in a tacked on fasion is enough reason to A) assume Nintendo is giving up on them or B) say that there was never a point to having them.

[Zach]

Yeah, it's a company Nintendo specifically hires for the Metroid Games. The game was made in collaboration with Nintendo (Retro Studios says so in his website), thus making it 2nd Party. It's the same case with Game Freak (Pokemon) and Intelligent Systems (Fire Emblem & Advance Wars)

Intelligent Systems is actually an internal development house owned by Nintendo. It was originally known as Nintendo Research and Development 1, led by Gunpei Yokoi.