Wasting the Waggle
Posted on
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
by Gary A. Ballard
I've been a vocal supporter of the Nintendo Wii and its motion-sensitive Wiimote. Since I saw the first video of the sword-fighting in Red Steel, I was hooked on the concept of using intuitive motions to execute video game actions as opposed to the established thumbstick and button-pushing interfaces of the past few generations. The waggle, as it's been somewhat derisively labeled, was a step along the path towards making video games not only accessible to more people, but more immersive in ways that didn't involve buying expensive HDTV's and adding more pixels. But I remain concerned that many developers are wasting the waggle by releasing half-assed games which use waggle because they feel obligated to waggle. Down that path lies the Virtual Boy, the Power Glove and other gimmicky controllers in video game history.
The Wii has so far shown itself to be a fantastic "party game" machine, with such sterling examples as Wii Sports, Super Mario Party 8, and Rayman Raving Rabbits. There's nothing wrong with these mini-game laden offerings targeted at people who are not traditionally considered gamers. Wii Parties as a cultural phenomenon aren't a bad thing, despite what many pissy elitist game developers and hardcore gamers might claim. Opening the market to non-traditional casual gamers means more money for developers, which should translate into more games and more games should be what every gamer wants.
That said, tossing out half-assed efforts with tacked-on waggle is going to do nothing to help anyone. Games like Marvel Ultimate Alliance are a perfect example of what I mean by tacked-on waggle. The game should have been something akin to Robot Jesus for comic book geeks like myself, but it failed miserably to attract me. The main reason, as my review states, is because the motion-controls were so obviously just button combinations mapped to specific Wiimote waggles. Why not use motions which feel organic to the action performed by the character onscreen? Why not make the player actually throw Captain America's shield instead of just flipping the Wiimote one direction? Why not map one button to Thor's hammer and let the direction and speed of the hammer throw depend on the player's arm motion? Why not use another button to select Thor's or Storm's lightning attacks and make the player reach to the skies and drag down lightning at the target the Wiimote is pointed at? In short, why was no imagination shown in adding waggle to the game? The most likely answer is money, of course. I'm positive Raven Software was forced to release the game during the launch window, and as a result took the easy way out, but they wasted a fantastic opportunity to create a true classic.
Another game which has wasted the waggle is Prince of Persia: Rival Swords. While I must say this game is one of the better games for the system, it's use of motion-control is paltry and weak. The only motions used are for sword-fighting and chain-tossing when in Dark Prince mode. Other than that, there is no use of the Wiimote's uniqueness. The sword-fighting use of the waggle is weak, another obvious use of static motions mapped to replace button combinations from other versions of the game. The controls are imprecise and for most of the combat, the harder to execute motions aren't needed. Unlike Ultimate Alliance, the game is spectacular in all other aspects, and the weak waggle controls don't detract from the game enough to earn a negative judgement on the game. Why again wasn't the Prince's sword mapped to the player's movements? Why wasn't his sword arm controlled organically by the Wiimote while his body's combat acrobatics were mapped to nunchuk waggles? Even something along the lines of Red Steel's swordfighting would have made combat more exciting. Again, the game was excellent, in part because it's focus was the acrobatic puzzle-solving instead of the ho-hum combat. But it could have been so much more with a little thought
Waggle controls should be used with some serious thought. If the waggle doesn't add anything to the game that couldn't be achieved better with a button press, don't use it. Mario Strikers Charged is a perfect example. The waggle is used in exactly two spots. The Wiimote can be flicked to execute a tackle, and the Wiimote's pointer is used to block megastrikes (similar to penalty kicks in real football). That's all, and that's all that's needed. While there might have been more uses of it, they may not have added anything to the gameplay. The release of EA Sports FIFA '08 in two weeks will use more waggling, and I anticipate it with excited trepidation. EA's track record on the Wii is not good, it's latest version of Madden NFL '08 actually a step backwards from the previous version.
One of the Wii's most vocal critic is Shiny founder David Perry, who has criticized the system's non-HD graphics hardware before. His latest comments exhibit a nonsensical criticism of the system by claiming that the Wii has "sloppy" waggle control. What he misses is that the sloppiness of the controls aren't a result of the hardware, but the software driving the games. Yes, there have been games with very sloppy waggle. EA's Need for Speed: Carbon, the aforementioned Ultimate Alliance and Far Cry: Vengeance come to mind as games with sloppy controls. Other games don't suffer from this, such as Zelda, Mario Strikers, Super Swing Golf and Call of Duty 3. The software has to be written well, not half-assed, and the blame for sloppy controls has to be placed squarely on the heads of the developers of the software, not the hardware.
The Wiimote's waggle won't revolutionize the video game interface without good, innovative design and careful, competent programming. Nintendo must ensure that the third-party developers who have flocked to the system because of its initial success aren't using the Wii as a dumping ground for sloppy, half-assed cheap development to fund their AAA titles on the systems elitist developers want to work on. If one year from now, developers are still allowed to release drek such as Far Cry or shovelware like Ultimate Alliance, the Wii WILL fade from the video game industry no matter how profitable its initial run was for the Big N. It's time to stop wasting the waggle, there's only so much wiggle room in the industry these days.
The Wii has so far shown itself to be a fantastic "party game" machine, with such sterling examples as Wii Sports, Super Mario Party 8, and Rayman Raving Rabbits. There's nothing wrong with these mini-game laden offerings targeted at people who are not traditionally considered gamers. Wii Parties as a cultural phenomenon aren't a bad thing, despite what many pissy elitist game developers and hardcore gamers might claim. Opening the market to non-traditional casual gamers means more money for developers, which should translate into more games and more games should be what every gamer wants.
That said, tossing out half-assed efforts with tacked-on waggle is going to do nothing to help anyone. Games like Marvel Ultimate Alliance are a perfect example of what I mean by tacked-on waggle. The game should have been something akin to Robot Jesus for comic book geeks like myself, but it failed miserably to attract me. The main reason, as my review states, is because the motion-controls were so obviously just button combinations mapped to specific Wiimote waggles. Why not use motions which feel organic to the action performed by the character onscreen? Why not make the player actually throw Captain America's shield instead of just flipping the Wiimote one direction? Why not map one button to Thor's hammer and let the direction and speed of the hammer throw depend on the player's arm motion? Why not use another button to select Thor's or Storm's lightning attacks and make the player reach to the skies and drag down lightning at the target the Wiimote is pointed at? In short, why was no imagination shown in adding waggle to the game? The most likely answer is money, of course. I'm positive Raven Software was forced to release the game during the launch window, and as a result took the easy way out, but they wasted a fantastic opportunity to create a true classic.
Another game which has wasted the waggle is Prince of Persia: Rival Swords. While I must say this game is one of the better games for the system, it's use of motion-control is paltry and weak. The only motions used are for sword-fighting and chain-tossing when in Dark Prince mode. Other than that, there is no use of the Wiimote's uniqueness. The sword-fighting use of the waggle is weak, another obvious use of static motions mapped to replace button combinations from other versions of the game. The controls are imprecise and for most of the combat, the harder to execute motions aren't needed. Unlike Ultimate Alliance, the game is spectacular in all other aspects, and the weak waggle controls don't detract from the game enough to earn a negative judgement on the game. Why again wasn't the Prince's sword mapped to the player's movements? Why wasn't his sword arm controlled organically by the Wiimote while his body's combat acrobatics were mapped to nunchuk waggles? Even something along the lines of Red Steel's swordfighting would have made combat more exciting. Again, the game was excellent, in part because it's focus was the acrobatic puzzle-solving instead of the ho-hum combat. But it could have been so much more with a little thought
Waggle controls should be used with some serious thought. If the waggle doesn't add anything to the game that couldn't be achieved better with a button press, don't use it. Mario Strikers Charged is a perfect example. The waggle is used in exactly two spots. The Wiimote can be flicked to execute a tackle, and the Wiimote's pointer is used to block megastrikes (similar to penalty kicks in real football). That's all, and that's all that's needed. While there might have been more uses of it, they may not have added anything to the gameplay. The release of EA Sports FIFA '08 in two weeks will use more waggling, and I anticipate it with excited trepidation. EA's track record on the Wii is not good, it's latest version of Madden NFL '08 actually a step backwards from the previous version.
One of the Wii's most vocal critic is Shiny founder David Perry, who has criticized the system's non-HD graphics hardware before. His latest comments exhibit a nonsensical criticism of the system by claiming that the Wii has "sloppy" waggle control. What he misses is that the sloppiness of the controls aren't a result of the hardware, but the software driving the games. Yes, there have been games with very sloppy waggle. EA's Need for Speed: Carbon, the aforementioned Ultimate Alliance and Far Cry: Vengeance come to mind as games with sloppy controls. Other games don't suffer from this, such as Zelda, Mario Strikers, Super Swing Golf and Call of Duty 3. The software has to be written well, not half-assed, and the blame for sloppy controls has to be placed squarely on the heads of the developers of the software, not the hardware.
The Wiimote's waggle won't revolutionize the video game interface without good, innovative design and careful, competent programming. Nintendo must ensure that the third-party developers who have flocked to the system because of its initial success aren't using the Wii as a dumping ground for sloppy, half-assed cheap development to fund their AAA titles on the systems elitist developers want to work on. If one year from now, developers are still allowed to release drek such as Far Cry or shovelware like Ultimate Alliance, the Wii WILL fade from the video game industry no matter how profitable its initial run was for the Big N. It's time to stop wasting the waggle, there's only so much wiggle room in the industry these days.
Labels: Game Design, Nintendo, Video Games, Wii
posted by Gary A. Ballard @ 9:43 AM
0 Comments
|
|
Save This Page
| 
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home