Call of Duty 3 Review

By Rob Fahey Published 18 December, 2006

One missed call.

Version tested: Wii

Unless you've spent the last week or so in a coma after being brained by a flying Wiimote, you're probably aware by now of just how successful the launch of Nintendo's latest has been - but a trawl of gamer opinion would reveal that among the hardcore, at least, there's still some skepticism over the long-term prospects for the console. That's not really based on any level of mistrust for Nintendo's ability to keep delivering great experiences for the Wii - the DS' track record banishes any lingering doubt in that regard - but rather on a well-founded concern over how third party publishers will cope with things like the new control scheme and the vast imbalance in power between this and other next-gen systems.

Call of Duty 3 is an early test for this aspect of the Wii - a high profile, cross-platform title which has reviewed well on other systems, and which comes to the Wii with toned down graphics but a unique control system. Despite the changes, the game shares a fair amount of DNA with its counterparts on the more traditional game systems, which makes it into a good benchmark for just how well the Wii fares when it comes to handling traditional, well-known game franchises.

The answer to that question should be obvious, really - but unfortunately, we suspect that it's not the answer that many fans of Nintendo's latest really want to hear.

Wii! (Uh!) What is it good for?

'Call of Duty 3' Screenshot wii1

First impressions count, and from the outset it doesn't really feel like COD3 is a game which has been designed with the Wii in mind. The first task you'll be asked to accomplish is entering your name, and rather than pointing at letters and clicking, in COD3 you're expected to navigate around a virtual keyboard with the d-pad. (Coincidentally, or not, the only other game we've seen do this so far is another Activision title - Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam.) It's a very minor point, of course, but it's sadly symptomatic of the biggest problem with this game - it's a traditional console game which has been ported to the Wii, not a game designed for the Wii from the ground up.

Once you're in the game, you're first presented with a training level where you learn to pick things up, aim and shoot, and throw grenades. This is where the problems that will plague the game for the next eight hours or so raise their ugly heads - the control mechanism, quite frankly, sucks. It works very similarly to the demo of Metroid Prime 3 we played at E3 back in May, but shows none of the fine tuning or careful thought that went into that, resulting in a frustrating and barely controllable mess. As you might expect, you move around using the analogue stick on the nunchuck, and aim your weapon with the Wiimote. In theory, you can aim your weapon around an area in the centre of the screen, and pushing against the sides moves the viewpoint around - which is how Metroid works, and how we imagine the majority of FPS games on the Wii will work.

'Call of Duty 3' Screenshot wii2

In practice, however, COD3's control system lacks any form of balance. The "dead zone" in which you can move around the crosshair before the viewpoint starts moving as well is tiny, which means that even small movements of the remote are translated into on-screen motion - and in order to keep your viewpoint steady, you need to point the remote almost perfectly at the centre of the screen. Even a slight tilt in how you hold the controller will result in your viewpoint steadily sliding away from what you're trying to look at.

In long-range combat, that's almost forgivable, because you can press the A button to peer down the sights of your weapon, which significantly reduces the sensitivity of the controller and allows you to target more accurately. When you're clearing buildings or trenches, though, that's a much less useful mechanism - and the hyperactive control system makes the experience far more frustrating than fun. Worst of all, it robs the game of the sense of satisfaction you can get from an FPS with a good control scheme - kills feel more lucky than skilled, which makes you wonder why you're bothering.

Heeding the Call

'Call of Duty 3' Screenshot wii3

Problems with the control system don't end with aiming, though - the developers have also chosen to put your grenade controls on the d-pad of the Wii, which is an incredibly annoying decision since it means that to access grenades (which play a really major role in most levels), you need to try and move your grip so that you can press on the d-pad without tilting the controller and hence ending up looking at the sky or the ground. One setting in the options screen does allow you to throw grenades with the nunchuck, which is a useful alteration to the system, but you still need to select a grenade on the d-pad before you can throw it. It breaks the flow of the game, and makes little sense as a gameplay mechanic.

The core shooting elements of the game feel, frankly, as though they were designed by people who had never actually spent significant time playing on the Wii - how else can you explain a game which seems to think that holding the Wiimote rock-steady and pointed at the exact centre of the screen is the most natural thing in the world? Several sub-games which use the motion sensing also raise the same suspicions; they're exactly the sort of thing which seems like a good idea when you write it down, but which clearly doesn't work terribly well in real life.

'Call of Duty 3' Screenshot wii4

The first of these you'll encounter is a melee combat system, which is actually incredibly dramatic when it happens - a clearly mental German soldier jumps you while running through a ruined house and tries to throttle you on the ground - but quickly reveals itself to be an incredibly weak piece of interaction. You're expected to fight off the soldier by holding the Wiimote and nunchuck horizontally and pumping them in and out alternately; then to finish him off by holding them like the butt of a rifle and slamming him in the face. Nice in theory, but once again, in practice the flaws are self-evident - not least because doing that gesture runs the risk of smacking the controllers off one another (I'm not especially cack-handed, and still managed to make worrying "crack" noises with the plastic a couple of times), but also because the game offers no feedback on whether you're actually doing the right thing or timing your thrusts correctly.

Another mini-game, the jeep driving, is more fun - you hold both controllers as if they were the sides of a steering wheel and drive around like that - but it does beg the question, why do it that way when Nintendo has already laid out a really simple steering mechanism which works by holding the Wiimote in both hands on its side? COD3's method is more fiddly and annoying, not least because it relies on the seemingly less accurate motion sensing of the nunchuck - and again, feels like something that probably looked better in a design document than it is in real life.

Don't Call Us, Wii'll Call You

'Call of Duty 3' Screenshot wii5

By now you're probably convinced that I hated COD3 - and to some extent, you'd be right. I felt bad for doing so, because it's painfully obvious that there's a fantastic WWII game in here; it's atmospheric, well-scripted, features varied levels and fantastic music... All the elements which would make a single-player WWII game great on any other platform are present and correct, but none of that really matters because the gameplay is broken to the extent that you find yourself longing for dual analogue sticks, let alone a keyboard and mouse.

The controls aren't the only broken thing in COD3 on the Wii, though - the graphics, while not awful by any means, aren't even up to the standards of Xbox games from the last generation. Whether this is down to the team not taking full advantage of the hardware, or an indication that the Wii really isn't suited to this kind of realistic art style, is something which only time will tell - but for now, COD3 is somewhat ugly, not because it's low resolution (Zelda manages to look stunning despite this drawback) but because it's very apparent that this is a game designed for near photo-realistic hi-def, which has been shoehorned backwards onto a less powerful console.

'Call of Duty 3' Screenshot wii6

The final deal-breaker, as far as I was concerned, came when I turned off the single-player campaign and decided to investigate the multiplayer options before writing the review. This paragraph will be short; there are no multiplayer options. Not online, which isn't surprising, but not even split-screen, either. Given what a major part of the COD offering on other platforms that is, this seems like just a teeny bit of an oversight, n'est pas?

However, in the final analysis, I can't really bring myself to intensely dislike COD3. The control system isn't much fun, and feels unfinished and somewhat unloved - but it is certainly possible to get to grips with it and to eke some enjoyment out of the superbly designed levels of the game. Even while battling against the limitations of the Wii port of the game, the fact that this is, at heart, one of the finest WWII games around still comes shining through from time to time, and that lifts the game from the doldrums of negativity to the point of being merely disappointingly average. This, we hope, is not the shape of things to come on the Wii, and the existence of games like Metroid, which demonstrate FPS gameplay working superbly on the console, is a beacon of hope for the genre - but right now, if you fancy shooting your way through the hedgerows of northern France, pick up the excellent versions of this game on other platforms, and give the Wii version a miss.

5 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Rob.

About Rob Fahey

Rob Fahey is a former editor of GamesIndustry.biz who spent several years living in Japan and probably still has a mint condition Dreamcast Samba de Amigo set.

Read more articles from Rob by visiting the Rob Fahey archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (213) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Wash #1 5 years ago

    bwahaha.

    Is getting funny now.

    edit: First.
    Edited by 2 at 18/12/06 @ 08:52

  • Psychotext #2 5 years ago

    * INCOMING *

  • gizmo #3 5 years ago

    Whoops. Control system problems are referred to an awful lot in these wii games considering it supposed to make it more transparent, not less.

  • Xerx3s #4 5 years ago

    Autch! Not the best launchline-up ever, is it?

    First impressions count, and from the outset it doesn't really feel like COD3 is a game which has been designed with the Wii in mind.

    My fear for multiplatform games. :(
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 09:02

  • Rambaldi #5 5 years ago

    So let me get this right: it looks pants, it's barely playable and it's got no multiplayer whatsoever, but it's still a bang on '5 is average'?

    Whatever.

  • JayPee #6 5 years ago

    1-page reveiw? WTF? Zelda got 4 pages (300% more), and was only 80% better than this?

    ED: Maths.

    Also, I agree after reading the review. Written up sounding a lot less than a 5. "I found myself trying not to hate COD3" - why? What does it owe you? Game-breaking controls, very poor grafix, NO online or multiplayer whatsoever, poor gameplay mechanics? and a 5? I've seen games get 3 or 4 for less.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 09:15

  • Rambaldi #7 5 years ago

    And I'm sorry, but if the picture of the guy playing a Wii FPS is anything to go by, NIntendo can shove it where the Wii don't shine.

    G I M M I C K

  • Steroyd #8 5 years ago

    Technically Zelda got Four 1 page reviews. ;)

  • Agent_Llama #9 5 years ago

    Don't get this score - especially when the likes of (the criminally under-rated) Dirge of Cerberus got 6 etc.

  • daedalus2 #10 5 years ago

    Not to nitpick, but it's "n'est-ce pas", not "n'est pas".

    OK, so I am nitpicking.

  • #11 5 years ago

    I have it on the 360 and it's not as much fun as COD2, so with the control problems and dodgy graphics there is no way I'm picking it up on wii.

  • Steroyd #12 5 years ago

    All the elements which would make a single-player WWII game great on any other platform are present and correct, but none of that really matters because the gameplay is broken to the extent that you find yourself longing for dual analogue sticks, let alone a keyboard and mouse.

    That basically sums it up for me, it'll be interest next year to see what happens to the wiibut for a starter it doesn't look good.

  • t8yman #13 5 years ago

    exactly what I have been saying for months, and agreed- the score doesnt even get close to matching the body of the review. yes kudos to ninty for at least innovating the console market, but the wii is a gimmick platform. and not a very good one at that.

  • Razz #14 5 years ago

    :o

    CoD 3 Wii is often lauded as having the best FPS controls for the Wii insofar. And I fully agree with it!

  • Razz #15 5 years ago

    :o

    CoD 3 Wii is often lauded as having the best FPS controls for the Wii insofar. And I fully agree with it!

  • mkreku #16 5 years ago

    But wasn't this always what the biggest worries about the Wii was? That it's a one-trick pony? That the controller will almost force developers to build games around it, unless they want the game to suck? With a little luck, the Wii will mean the end of the lazy console-to-console ports. With a little bad luck, it won't be the end of them, but the Wii ends up with the short straw every time.

  • repairmanjack #17 5 years ago

    "The control system isn't much fun, and feels unfinished and somewhat unloved..."

    I'm starting to wonder just how much we'll be seeing iterations of this line in future reviews. Whenever they might be. (Upcoming release schedule is a little thin for my liking.) Glad I waited on the Wii.

  • kangarootoo #18 5 years ago

    My thoughts.

    First off, this is disappointing rather than funny. People who say this is funny and take some kind of bizarre pleasure in seeing bad games appear need to grow up and get some self confidence (because exagerated platform allegiance is born of insecurity as we all know). I never stop being disappointed by the occasional immaturity of gamers, just like I suppose the occasional gamers will never tire of being immature.

    Secondly, this says nothing about whether the Wii is a gimmick or not. This simply says that the developer in question did not make the best use of the control system (among other issues). If you gave someone a steering wheel and they came up with a poor driving game, you wouldn't suggest it was the fault of a "gimmicky steering wheel". You would simply accept that the individual driving title in question was a poor effort (for whatever reason).

    Thats what I see here going by the review, a poor FPS that happens to be on the Wii. I mean its not like we haven't seen hundreds of poor FPS games on all platforms in the past is it? If the game failed BECAUSE the dev couldn't do something positive with the Wii controls then that is still the dev's fault I'm afraid to say.

  • AcidSnake #19 5 years ago

    Didn't the first batch of DS titles have stupid and gimmicky use of the touch screen as well?
    Give the developers time...

  • varsas #20 5 years ago

    Disappointing...did any of the 3rd Party developers actually put the game through testing and QA?

  • t8yman #21 5 years ago

    the wii is a gimmick system, its a gc with a fancy controller. cod3 is a decent game on the other platforms, not as good as cod2 imho, but a 7 or 8 for me. it simply stands to reason that the gimmick control system cannot work for fps's. I await the day I stand corrected. I have a 360, will get a ps3 when it launches here in 2008 but have never had even the slightest twinge to shell out for a wii. If M$ had just launched xbox 1.1 instead of the 360, but gave it a kerayzee control system, they would have been laughed out of the market. ninty - because of their pedigree have been heralded as the saviour of the games console by launching GC 1.1 with a kerayzee control system.

  • Steroyd #22 5 years ago

    But kangarootoo the problem i have many others have cited is that devs will probably "port" games to the wii instead of having the desired effect of making them think about the platform thoroughly thus being the end of lazy ports for the wii at least.

    Throughout this review he makes it sound that the wii idea's sound good on paper but in practice it doesn't work, which is a trend i don't want to see in 2007.

    granted it's early days, but given how most third party devs havn't even grasped the DS touchscreen beyond menu selecting for the past 2 years but at least has the option to use traditional controls i'm not holding out on hope that this trend will change.

    @t8yman

    Just wait until Metroid prime comes out Nintendo will show how it's done.

    ...But Nintendo always shows third party devs how it's done and they never pay attention.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 09:44

  • cooper #23 5 years ago

    I finally got the chance to have some extended play time with the Wii over the Weekend - Zelda, Wii Sports and Wii Play (if we can call this last one a game).
    Unfortunately, it definitely feels like a one trick pony to me, and I can't imagine how would anyone make the Wiimote work with a broad range of games.

    Also, people seem to have unrealistic expectations on how precise the pointing interface is. Some time ago I thought "it'd be nice to have an Advance Wars or Fire Emblem where you point at units on the screen". Now I just think it would be a horribly annoying experience.

    Don't get me wrong, I still hope someone manages to make it work (if anything, for Metroid's sake), but I'm less than optimistic at the moment.

    I believe the main issue is to try to shoehorn everything into the Wiimote, and it would work much better if it was only used for games that are better suited for this motion sensing thing.

    Disclaimer: I love my Cube and DS, so please avoid the fanboyish rants.

  • trevd72 #24 5 years ago

    i finally got round to playing zelda properly at the weekend and the use of the slingshot gave me the feeling that the controls that I thought would make fps excellent felt wrongs and twitchy, nothing near the use of a mouse to aim. then this review backed that feeling up. i am starting to get the feeling this is not going to work too well.

    also slightly peeved that zelda is a gamecube game on a big disk.

    loving COD3 on live though......best thing since halo2 "you yanky bar-stard"

  • Dizzy #25 5 years ago

    The Wii will just need some time (like the DS) to shine. Devs need to stop making games for Wii that exist on 360 (since Wii cannot compete with these games anyway) and think about new IP and new game styles.

    This is the reason I decided to wait out the Wii until late next year.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 09:48

  • magicpanda #26 5 years ago

    Lazy Devs! They didnt include multiplayer of any kind! Meh, personally, I can play this kind of shite on my laptop.

    EA have put together an enitire development studio just for the Wii, I have high hopes for for some of thier franchises. Tiger Woods, if they crack the Wii control system, for example could be the best golf game on any system for a long long time to come.

  • rashes #27 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    I don;t think it is fanboyism that is driving a slight backlash to the Wii. I have a 360. I'm buying a DS this week and I will eventually get a PS3.
    I think that some people are a little concerned about the direction gaming could take. If a glorified GameCube with (in my opinion) gimicky controller sells lots and lots the PS3 could flop and the 360 could be reduced to a niche hardcore games machine and nothing else. I would not like to see that.. I would not think it's a good thing if the least powerful console was the market leader.
    I think the Wii is a step back in some ways... e.g. the online support is poor.

    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 09:57

  • kangarootoo #28 5 years ago

    @t8yman

    People said exactly the same thing about twin sticks compared to a mouse and keyboard, and for a while they were right. Then Halo came along and showed it could be done if the dev simply gets it right. As someone else said, it takes devs a while to get their heads around new stuff like this. There is pressure to "do something with the new controller" but eventually people start working out ways to do useful and intuitive stuff with the new system (I expect we will see a similar thing with the sixaxis at first, until devs discover what works and what doesn't).

    @Steroyd

    I agree that we may see some badly "ported" games, but from your own words surely you will agree that the fault there lies with the devs. I firmly believe that the Wii is not a gimmick (for context, I don't own one and have no immediate purchase plans, but I still think its a good system) console. It presents a challenge for devs, but those that meet the challenge will be able to create some amazing stuff. The DS is a living breathing example of exactly that kind of situation. There will always be some guff, as there still is on the DS, but the good stuff that is out there shows the platform itself has the potential. We have to hope that quality development will realise that potential (I am also not that optimistic, because lets face it the majority of games aren't that good, and I know the reason why).

  • kangarootoo #29 5 years ago

    @rashes

    I agree, I'm not saying it is fanboyism that drives the genuine concerns. I do however think it is fanboyism that drives comments like the first one in this thread. But that isn't really the focus of the current discussion so lets not dwell on it :)

  • darkmistx #30 5 years ago

    I think this just shows the shape of things to come for the Wii. Third party devs won't to bother to even try and innovate with the wiimote, they'll just keep shoehorning their regular franchises onto it, and tack on the control system as an afterthought.

  • Muddtallica #31 5 years ago

    Ugh...it's barely even worth asking, but what's to be happy about if this game, or indeed the Wii in general, is a failure? How does that actually benefit anybody, even if they had no plans to buy the system? All I see here is the disappointing failure of a promising and potentially very original concept. Woo hoo, I guess.

    In any case, did anybody even read the review? From all accounts, the failings of Call of Duty Wii are nothing to do with its concept, but more its execution. Is that a statement that can be extended to the Wii in general? Only time will tell, but reviews of CoD suggest to me that its failings are the developer's, not the console's. Zelda has proved that Wii graphics don't need to be ugly. Metroid, from all the reports I've read, will prove that Wii FPS controls need not be imprecise, juddery and uncustomisable. A whole host of titles coming out in 2007 will prove that Wii can handle online play. Like any machine, if the developers are willing to put in the hard graft, they'll get good results. My fear is that the failure of early projects like this, even though it's clearly a poorly-executed rush-job, will dissuade developers from doing so, in which case the whole Wii venture will die on its arse.

    And I can't see how that's anything but a bad thing.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #32 5 years ago

    Not that I want games to get low ratings but I wonder how that 5 in the end measures up. The review makes it clear that the control scheme is bad, sometimes really bad. Then again I heard that the controls are the best of a FPS game on the Wii - which basically states that they are better than Red Steel's because there are not too many FPS around. And seeing the 360 version getting a 7 which inludes a great multiplayer mode puts things quite into a perspective I do not really understand. Luckily I don't give a damn about the scores and this review, again, questions the very existance of scores.

    Too bad though that the launch line up of the Wii seems rather bad. Luckily it seems like the developers are the ones to "blame" not the controls.

  • AcidSnake #33 5 years ago

    I would not think it's a good thing if the least powerful console was the market leader.

    I'd think that the console offering the most fun should have to be market leader...
    Power doesn't factor into it...
    Wasn't it all about the games?

  • rashes #34 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    Fair enough. I agree with you there but thats the forums for you. But the point still remains that a lot of Wii chearleading has not taken into account the possible negative effects of a dominant Wii.
    I think people forget just how popular the Wii could be and that it might will be 360 and PS3 playing the part of the underdogs.
    I'm not sure if that is a good thing.

  • magicpanda #35 5 years ago

    Rashes Wrote: I think the Wii is a step back in some ways... e.g. the online support is poor.

    In the little wiis defence, online multiplayer support is poor at the moment, (it's been out a couple of weeks) the other online support however is fantastic.

  • rashes #36 5 years ago

    @AcidSnake

    I'm not getting into the whole Graphic Vs. gameplay debate but in my opinion they are linked. Graphics increase immersion and enjoyment, etc. etc. blah
    I've always looked forward to each iteration of graphical fidelity. It's part of gaming... always has been.

    Anyway .. if it's about 'The games' ... apart from Zelda that doesn't seem to be going that well either (but it's early days).

  • rashes #37 5 years ago

    @Magic Panda

    Does it have friends list and that? Cross game invites? Achievments (or the equiv)?
    Why are the lauch games not supporting online (they did on both other consoles)?
    It doesn't seem like it's big consideration like it is for PS3 and in particular 360.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 10:11

  • Muddtallica #38 5 years ago

    rashes: I suppose that's one reason why people might actively not want Wii to succeed, but I don't think it's really an issue. Nintendo's decision to design their hardware in a completely different way from their competitors has all but enshrined a place in the market for the 360 and PS3 - as it stands now, there is a universe of games that developers want to make, and that gamers want to play, that can only be accomplished on the two powerhouses - Oblivion springs to mind, as, inevitably, will GTA4. In any case, the 360 is established and going strong, and the PS3 will not flop - if it does, it will due to Sony's own bungling and the direct competition of Microsoft. Despite the success of the launch, the next-gen console in the most fragile position remains the Wii, and failed projects like this will very quickly dissipate the early goodwill.
    Edited by 2 at 18/12/06 @ 10:14

  • kangarootoo #39 5 years ago

    @rashes

    I don't think the Wii will go the distance on gimmick alone. The TV adverts we are seeing now will shift units for Xmas, no doubt. But a year from now, if the overall quality of titles is low I don't think the Wii will be leading anything. If the Wii does end up being the market leader, I think we have to assume that good games is what will keep it in that position.

    I'm personally in favour of a risk balance type system. I think this industry needs some risky concepts from time to time to keep things turning over. By all means lets have some safe projects that give a better guarantee of a solid gameplay experience (I personally think originality for its own sake is overated, when compared to good solid fun gameplay), but lets also have some ideas that require developers to push themselves. Some will fail for sure, but others will (every so often) do the business and make it all worth while.

    The Wii is a system that allows for risky concepts to be explored, but I think people are focussing on that too narrowly. It also allows perfectly "normal" types of games to be developed, using a GC controller to drive the interface. So its not tilty-pointy-game or nothing, just like the DS is not "all about the stylus" if the game doesn't require it to be.

  • AcidSnake #40 5 years ago

    @Rashes:

    Ok, I just think that 'fun' is the end product...
    Errr...I'll try to be clearer...

    If you want better graphics to enjoy a game more, then by definition you have more fun with a graphically outstanding game...
    So I'm trying to say that if one game is more fun than another than graphics and gameplay are already factored in and calculated for both...
    Did I make sense? :)

    I agree on the early days bit, and so far I only have Zelda, but will be getting rayman soon...Then I'll see how the games really hold up...
    And indeed the initial batch seems a bit lackluster...

  • rashes #41 5 years ago

    @Muddtallica

    Yeah. You are probably right.. the Wii is in a different place to the others I guess and hopefully they can compliment each other.
    Still possible that the Wii could seriously hurt the sales figures of the other 2. Apart from the type of people that post on these forums, I imagine most households are one console houses... especially if being purchased for children.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 10:18

  • Muddtallica #42 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: Whilst I do agree with pretty much everything else you've been saying, I do think generally speaking, it is "Wiimote or nothing" as far as developing games for the platform is concerned. Let's not forget that technically speaking, the motion controls are the only ace that Wii holds (though it is a significant one) - it gets beaten hands down in all other respects. If the developer has no interest in taking advantage of the system's sole hardware advantage, why would they develop for the system?

  • andromeda #43 5 years ago

    With teh exception of maybe Zelda..which ive got now on the cube, there aint any other reason to get a wii. I hope metroid is released on the cube as well, then i'll never need a reason to buy the gimmick..

  • MadMirko #44 5 years ago

    Oh calm down, "one trick pony crowd" and "control issue crowd". First I suggest playing a Wii, second is reading the conclusion of the review, from which I copied:

    This, we hope, is not the shape of things to come on the Wii, and the existence of games like Metroid, which demonstrate FPS gameplay working superbly on the console

    Third is judge the console by the good titles, otherwise you'd end up with only bad consoles. CoDIII may be a GC port with tacked on Wii controls, but that in itself can make for a very good game (even though it doesn't in this case). Look at Zelda, which is one of the (if not THE) best game(s) to play on the current gen.

  • MadMirko #45 5 years ago

    If the developer has no interest in taking advantage of the system's sole hardware advantage, why would they develop for the system?

    Like always: Because it offers the greatest chance of profit. Look at the PS3. Your game in HD will cost so much that even if each and every current PS3 owner would buy it, you'd still not have anything worthwile. There is the XBox, where things look much better... if you are not a Japanese developer.

    What's left? The Wii. Cheap and available in quantities, with the added bonus of you not having to spend as much money for graphic assets.

    I've seen tougher choices.

  • rhinoxious #46 5 years ago

    I was a little dubious about my wii when I first got it.

    But now my wife is playing zelda, not just sitting there telling me to press this, or push that. BUT ACTUALLY HOLDING THE CONTROLLERS AND PLAYING IT HERSELF!!!!!

    I haven't seen her pick up a joypad in six or seven years, and definitely never for a game that had a full 3D world with camera controls. Apparently the seperate controllers in seperate hands are easier to get your head around than one big controller with a billion buttons and sticks on.

    So I have to give the 'gimmick' controller my full recommendation.

  • kangarootoo #47 5 years ago

    @Muddtallica

    I guess the only answer I can give is the same reason that some devs develop for the DS without really using the stylus in their gameplay (making money in other words). If people own a Wii, they will buy Wii games, so even a game that doesn't use the wiimote has a customer base.

    Its a bit of a hollow answer I admit in light of all my talk of originality and risk taking and I too can't see a huge insentive if non-wiimote games is all a dev ever does on Wii (as the martgins won't be that high on that sort of thing I would expect).

    I just figure the facility is there, so maybe devs new to the platform can get up to speed making a more traditional title and maybe THEN work on a subsequent title that is very wiimote driven. I like options :)

  • rhinoxious #48 5 years ago

    "With teh exception of maybe Zelda..which ive got now on the cube, there aint any other reason to get a wii."

    Except to play Zelda in widescreen, which for me is essential.

    And Metroid will never come out on cube, check the wiki pages on the hardware specs, the wii has a lot more grunt and future titles will show this:

    Wii:

    CPU: PowerPC based "Broadway" processor, clocked at 729 MHz
    GPU: ATI "Hollywood" GPU clocked at 243 MHz
    91MB total system RAM (64 main, 24 graphics, 3 video buffer)

    Gamecube:

    Name: "Gekko"
    Producer: IBM
    Clock Frequency: 485 MHz
    40MB total system RAM (24 main, 16 video)

    Name: "Flipper"
    Producer: ArtX/Nintendo (ArtX was acquired by ATI Technologies in 2000 and is now a part of AMD.)
    Clock Frequency: 162 MHz


    Now I know that clock speeds aren't the whole story, and we can see it's no 360/PS3, but the idea that it's a gamecube with a different controller is simply wrong. With time the wii should be able to produce some stunning looking SD games.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 10:41

  • gaijin #49 5 years ago

    I think part of the difficulty here is that we haven't seen what EG think of CoD3 on any other system, so it's hard to judge whether it's a better game that's been partially borked by the port or has issues across the board anyway?

    I can't see that the Wii is a major threat to the market viability of all other games machines except perhaps in the more price-dependent "let's get little Jemima one of those games playing thingies that the young folks like for Christmas, don't know anything about them, which is the cheapest?" sector, which comes but once a year (thank god) anyway. And probably involves a Bratz game as well.

    /envisages a huxleyesque future dystopia where everyone has to play Bratz on a Wii
    /cataleptic

  • spongebob #50 5 years ago

    Things will really start bright for Wii when a 3rd party title emerges that is as good as Marios, Metroids and Zeldas. And it will become even sweeter if some Western dev is able to do it.

  • PlugMonkey #51 5 years ago

    With a little luck, the Wii will mean the end of the lazy console-to-console ports.

    If the DS is anything to go by, the Wii will have an enormous catalogue of cack-arsed lazy conversions that you have to ignore in favour of the small range of fantastic bespoke titles.

    Likewise, judging and condemning the Wii because of a crap CoD conversion is like saying the DS will be a failure because FIFA isn't very good on it.

  • aldo_14 #52 5 years ago

    the wii is a gimmick system, its a gc with a fancy controller. cod3 is a decent game on the other platforms, not as good as cod2 imho, but a 7 or 8 for me. it simply stands to reason that the gimmick control system cannot work for fps's. I await the day I stand corrected.

    Get the parents, etc, round and play Wii Sports and you can see very easily that it's not a 'gimmick'; it's actually incredibly succesfull at making the system accessible and you will not see the PS3 or 360 having the same ability to make non-gamers play it. Yes, it's not as powerful as the other consoles (but bear in mind that most cross-platform games will be most likely using a mix of PS2 and Xbox rather than next-gen assets anyways, whilst the Wii is still new), but surely that's irrelevant if it's fun?

    Yeah, bleat on about 'gamecube with new controls' etc if you will, but ultimately it's idiotic to view the merits of a games system on the basis of polygons and fill rates rather than actual games; and it's too early to judge the games for the Wii in the same was as it was too early to judge the 360 when it released with one of the worst launch line-ups in memory.

    And, of course, the review itself states the control system works for Metroid Prime; in fact, you're making a pointless criticism here - it's not as if we've not seen FPS with bad control systems on dual analogues, is it? No-one ever said the Wii setup would instantly make all games control well, it's still a technical challenge as every controller is.

    Unfortunately, if you really think ever increasing complexity and obscurity of control is the only option for the future of console games, then you've obviously already made your mind up.

  • Muddtallica #53 5 years ago

    spongebob: Well, Retro are a western developer...but they always seem to fall under the Nintendo umbrella, so I know what you mean. It would help the Wii a lot to have a developer like Rare in its prime, to show everyone that the knowledge of how to make good Nintendo console games isn't locked up in a box in Kyoto somewhere. Hopefully the early good sales will get the rears of Konami, Capcom, Square and (possibly) Sega into gear.

    kangarootoo, MadMirko: That's true actually - there are, when I come to think of it, a glut of DS games clearly designed with all eyes on bottom line profit and none on the hardware's pros and cons from a game design POV, but I can't think of any of those games that are actually good. Maybe I'm being naive, but I do believe that any developer with enough quality to produce a game worth playing will also have the integrity to choose the platform that's right for the project, not the wallet...that being so, any potential problem of the Wii's success taking away games that would have been best served by the PS3/360 hardware shouldn't really be an issue.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 10:59

  • varsas #54 5 years ago

    @Steroyd:

    But kangarootoo the problem i have many others have cited is that devs will probably "port" games to the wii instead of having the desired effect of making them think about the platform thoroughly thus being the end of lazy ports for the wii at least.

    Surprisingly EA, at least with the Madden game, seem to be looking at building with some thought to the Wii concept; the reviews for Madden have been very good although some tweaking still needs to be done.

    granted it's early days, but given how most third party devs havn't even grasped the DS touchscreen beyond menu selecting for the past 2 years but at least has the option to use traditional controls i'm not holding out on hope that this trend will change.

    I think some devs have gotten their head around the DS and why there are some excellent games available for it. However there is still too much crap...I just hope that enough devs see the light, as some have with the DS, to make the Wii a viable long term platform.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 11:00

  • jimbob101 #55 5 years ago

    really simple steering mechanism which works by holding the Wiimote in both hands on its side?

    Do you drop the Nunchuck and let it hang while driving. Mmmm must have low pressure in the front right tyre, the cars pulling right.

  • kangarootoo #56 5 years ago

    @Muddtallica

    "but I do believe that any developer with enough quality to produce a game worth playing will also have the integrity to choose the platform that's right for the project"

    Unfortunately, integrity isn't part of the equation.

    Stuff like "how much does it cost to develop for platform X", "do we have an engine that runs on that platform", "do we have any coders who have worked on it before", "how much will we get paid to work on that platform", "how many units might we sell", "what are the risks of dev'ing on that platform" and many many more are what drive the decisions.

    Integrity is good, and I'm not saying its lacking in big business (truthfully, it is, but anyway) but it won't pay the bills (and the bills have to get paid, or there are no games for anyone).

  • Pho-Zoon #57 5 years ago

    The argument that a successful Wii will damage the industry is ridiculous. If the console becomes the market leader then third-party devs will put more money into their games, to ensure they don't turn out like this first batch. More publishers will be interested in the system, and more games will be created for it. As such, there'll be more competition, which in turn pushes the standard of games up.

    Mind you, I don't think it will happen.

  • #58 5 years ago

    The Wii will live or die with it's equivalent of Nintendogs, Brain Age, 42 All Time Classics etc etc. This target market does not care about graphics and could care even less about this type of game (beyond merely giving it a quick play and moving on). If Wii Sports and Wii Play is any indication, the signs are positive - particularly in Japan where the said two titles outsold even Zelda.

    Though Nintendo would never admit it, they've abandoned the "hard-core" to MS/Sony.

  • rudedudejude #59 5 years ago

    hahahaha stupid developers doing a 2 day fudge job 'crap, we need to make it work with that wii thing!!' job.

    What a bunch of tits. Thanks guys, for making another half arsed wii port.

  • crazyhorse174 #60 5 years ago

    OK, the way I see it here, the Wii is supposed to be aimed at people who dont play much games, to try and encourage them to have fun playing. I've seen a ton of arguments on here about "getting the parents" around cause they'll love it, which is all fine and dandy - anything that gets new people to enjoy games is great.

    But the problem that I now see is that, people who aren't interested in games, aren't going to be persuaded by a bit of jumping around playing tennis or bowling in the loving room. Sure, they'll have some fun, probably after a few drinks at a party this Christmas, but is it really going to make them rush out and buy all the newest games? Will they suddenly become huge videogame fans and decide to start playing Oblivion, Halo, Final Fantasy, et al, simply because of an original, if somewhat skewed control system? I'm not convinced.

    I really think that the Wii will be great for party games - games where people want a quick fix, but for anything a bit more serious, I really fear that it wont deliver. I dont have any desire for Nintendo to fail - on the contrary, anything that can stir up a stagnant gaming industry has to be applauded - I just think the Wii isnt the device to do it.

    I'll probably be proven wrong however. (As usual)

    And to everyone who uses the argument that Zelda is the best game out for the Wii just now - come on! That argument doesn't really cut it, does it? Its the same game on the GC (albeit mirrored and with a different control method), so is that really a good benchmark for Wii games to come?

    For the record though - it is fantastic on the GC! I'm losing my life to it at the moment!!

  • spongebob #61 5 years ago

    The Wii will live or die with it's equivalent of Nintendogs, Brain Age, 42 All Time Classics etc etc. This target market does not care about graphics and could care even less about this type of game (beyond merely giving it a quick play and moving on). If Wii Sports and Wii Play is any indication, the signs are positive - particularly in Japan where the said two titles outsold even Zelda.

    The fact that DS became the champion because of Nintendogs, Brain Age and the likes makes it sort of the Game & Watch of our time. Nintendo can talk about old people digging their products and middle-aged people buying their stuff, but outside Japan it's the kids and young families that bought their concept.

    Though Nintendo would never admit it, they've abandoned the "hard-core" to MS/Sony.

    They've also clearly decided to aim for the toy video console market. Of course there will be a few "adult" games on Wii just like there was on GC, but primarily Wii is a family and kids console. Nothing bad about it. If I had kids, I'd most definitely buy Wii and let them grow with playing Zelda and all those games. And together we could then enjoy Wii Sports and the likes.

    But the problem that I now see is that, people who aren't interested in games, aren't going to be persuaded by a bit of jumping around playing tennis or bowling in the loving room. Sure, they'll have some fun, probably after a few drinks at a party this Christmas, but is it really going to make them rush out and buy all the newest games? Will they suddenly become huge videogame fans and decide to start playing Oblivion, Halo, Final Fantasy, et al, simply because of an original, if somewhat skewed control system? I'm not convinced.

    You're completely right. Wii or DS won't introduce people to the world of video gaming and these two won't change the video game art. Actually what happens is that "regular" people will see video gaming even more as a subsidiary of toys. This means that ambitious devs will have even harder time convincing software houses to back up their artistic endeavours, especially when it's story driven and the story is not just slapped on so it somehow meshes together the random controller whacking.

    ps. Muddtallica, you're right about Retro. Thanks for reminding me they're a Western dev (although tightly quality controlled by Nintendo in Japan).
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 11:40

  • kangarootoo #62 5 years ago

    @Adam_T

    They did it specifically to piss you off too, but then you already knew that.

  • jonnyreb #63 5 years ago

    Quote Crazyhorse174
    "I really think that the Wii will be great for party games - games where people want a quick fix, but for anything a bit more serious, I really fear that it wont deliver"

    This is exactly my fear - it's a bit like the old 'Winter Olympic' style sports games that you get out at Christmas so the Grandparents can see what all these 'new fangled video games' are about.

    After Grandad has given the controller a good thrashing after his morning sherry (ooh missus) then it gets put back in the box until next year.

    I've only played on a friend's Wii, and after 30 mins or so I found myself longing for a traditional controller....I actually found my arms getting tired very quickly.

    I wish Nintendo all the very best though, and applaud them for trying to do something different.

    In terms of the graphics...I actually spend more time playing my PS2 instead of my 360 simply because (IMHO) the games are better - so far anyway, so I don't subscribe to the 'crap graphics' fanboys.

  • cooper #64 5 years ago

    The main difference between DS and Wii is that the DS comes with a d-pad and buttons, and it has the stylus functionality as a bonus. So far the best DS games for me have been both Castlevanias, Phoenix Wright and Advance Wars - games that don't even need the stylus at all (OK, Dawn of Sorrow has some horrible stylus bits shoehorned in, but it'd be much better without those).

    It's safe to assume most devs would develop for the Wiimote, as it's the only controller included in the box. No matter what happens with the Wii in the future, I believe the lack of a "classic" controller bundled with the Wii is what hurts it the most for me (given the type of games I like).

    If the killer apps for the Wii will be the equivalent of Nintendogs or 42 Classic Games (sort of like Wii Sports and Wii Play), then I'm not really interested. It's nice to see "non-gamers" (whatever that means) interested in the Wii, but I'm not that type of gamer.

    In the end, if the Wii works out ok for Nintendo, good for them. If I don't get a Wii, I'll just invest more in 360/PS3 games.

  • Muddtallica #65 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: That's true, but I don't think releasing non-Wiimote-based games on the sytem makes sense even from a financial POV. Motion-control is the system's modus operandi, and is the unique selling point of all its games. Take that away, and the game puts itself back in direct competition with those on other systems, but with a huge technical handicap...is there a sufficient market for such games?

    Also: it's worth bearing in mind that we still haven't seen a proper "gamer's game" for the Wii yet from Nintendo themselves. Wii Sports, Wii Play, WarioWare etc. all fall in to the "new gamer's" bracket, like a Nintendogs or a Brain Training, but in terms of old-fashioned games, Nintendo have yet to show their hand, other than Zelda, which is a GC port intended to bolster the launch more than really showcase the new control system. There's yet to be a project from them of Mario 64-like proportions, one that really showcases exactly what Nintendo's planning with the new hardware, but I don't doubt there will be soon - maybe Mario Galaxy?

  • kangarootoo #66 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174

    "Will they suddenly become huge videogame fans and decide to start playing Oblivion, Halo, Final Fantasy, et al, simply because of an original, if somewhat skewed control system? I'm not convinced. "

    Haaaaang on a second. Where do I begin. First off, being a huge videogames fan means that you like videogames. It doesn't set the agenda as to what sorts of games you then prefer. Its like saying someone has just become a huge film fan, and then assuming that means they like Hollywood blockbusters.

    You aren't convinced, neither am I and I guarantee you neither are Nintendo. Because I don't for a second believe that the path you describe above is one they imagine their "new gamers" (as I shall call them) will follow.

    If Wii Bowling and Wii Golf is what gets someone's Grandad on board, then Nintendo know full well what kind of games will be required to keep them interested. Just like they aren't about to try selling Splinter Cell DS to the people that bought into the DS via Brain Training et al.

    CoD3 is a perfectly valid game to release on the Wii (even if this iteration needs work poor), but it isn't setting Nintendo's agenda or business plan. I suppose this is one of things that frustrates me about the way games are seen by gamers themselves (and I'm sorry to dance about all over your post, I'm trying to make a general point rather than get on your case).

    A system like the Wii (or the 360, or the PS3, if devs can just branch out more) can support many gamers with many tastes. The console is just a platform, just wires and lights. Even the type of controller does not dictate the type of games that can be supported (it is peoples' own imaginations that provide that restriction, and I think confusing the two is too common a mistake). So in an ideal world, the people who loved Wii Tennis should be able to get plenty of fun out of their console without having to so much as open their eyes in the direction of NFS or GeOW type content.

    Whether that is possible is up to the devs and publishers. If the Wii Sports type titles drop off, and grannies the world over have to fall back on Oblivion and Halo (to use your examples) then you are quite right to be unconvinced as to how successful that will be.

  • kangarootoo #67 5 years ago

    @Muddtallica

    "Take that away, and the game puts itself back in direct competition with those on other systems"

    But only for those customers who own the other systems too. We get used to comparing consoles in a sort of bubble, where everything is available to all of us. But if the Wii is the only console someone owns, what is available on the competitor platforms becomes irrelevant (unilt they look at buying another console).

    So lets say I own a Wii, and I like wiimote games. I also like Splinter Cell, but I don't want to buy a PS3 or 360 in order to play it. I therefore am the market for non-wiimote games. Now SC is a bad example because it a high budget title, are you are quite right, the installed base for that sort of thing is low. However, a title with cheaper production costs could do perfectly well.

    Another way to see it is to compare to XBLive Arcade. People have this next gen machine, but they are still happy to play what are essentially last gen (plus a few) titles. They do so for the variety, they like their GeOW but they are happy to play other types of games that are not really core to what the 360 is all about. I can see the same situation existing on Wii. Its not a big market, but it is a niche, and for a new dev that is an opportunity.

    "it's worth bearing in mind that we still haven't seen a proper "gamer's game" for the Wii yet from Nintendo themselves"

    I totally agree. The current raft of games is sort of relying heavily on the novelty of the tech. But I don't believe Nintendo expect to do that forever, and the Mario Galaxy example you cite I think is the perfect example. Bear in mind, the thing has barely been out a month so I wouldn't expect its potential to be opened up yet. All launch lineups suck ass, they always have. We forget that each time around and start making judgements too early. Give it a year and lets have this conversation again :) I don't guarantee success for the Wii, but I am certain the potential is there for all the variety and "true gameplay" that people (including me) are asking for.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 11:55

  • MadMirko #68 5 years ago

    there are, when I come to think of it, a glut of DS games clearly designed with all eyes on bottom line profit and none on the hardware's pros and cons from a game design POV, but I can't think of any of those games that are actually good

    The newest that comes to (my) mind ist DQIX. Square's shares jumped like they didn't for 21 months, just because they anounced their hugely popular series for the hugely popular platform. Switching the platform of course has some effects on the game, if you switch to a Nintendo platform.

    "Integrity" has nothing to do with it. If you make a good game you want compensation, publicity and stardom. And rightly so, to us as consumers a game for a platform we actually have is worth more than for one we don't have.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 12:08

  • kangarootoo #69 5 years ago

    "to us as consumers a game for a platform we actually have is worth more worth than for one we don't have"

    Very well put.

  • varsas #70 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174:
    Will they suddenly become huge videogame fans and decide to start playing Oblivion, Halo, Final Fantasy, et al, simply because of an original, if somewhat skewed control system? I'm not convinced.

    An interesting point but there is a perfect example of theBBC website. A female journalist who doesn't play games tried the console out; she found Warioware fun but it was Zelda that most interested her.

    I think the fun simple games will draw new gamers in and then the great games like Zelda will get them hooked. However I don't think the hardcore 'geeky' games like Oblivion or Halo will hook them, they need to be more accessible like Zelda.

  • mowgli #71 5 years ago

    I didnt agree with thte review (thought it was a bit shite really), when i first got the game i was not impressed(was right there) it was very hard to controll and it only had me worried about the future, but after 5-10 mins i was getting alot better, and very soon i was loving it. It does what its meant to - namely have you moving about and twisting to see round courners and getting all streesed out when your under heavy fire and you heart is beating.

    I will be walking along on the way to an objetive nice and relaxed then i will jump up when under fire and be aiming (and i mean actualy poised at the TV, as opposed to pressing up on an anologue stick) ready to shoot. Being a long standing devout PC shooter i was not expercting much at all but its a whole new experience and i fucking love it!

    You can redisign characters and improve graphics untill your arse starts bleeding but it is basically exactly the same game! THIS IS SOMETHING NEW! I was avoiding Red Steel because i heard shit reviews but i might actually pick it up now after reading that.

    And it might just be due to my absence from console gaming for a while but i am enjoying playing a fun (and i mean very fun!) shooter without basing my opinion on how many fps im getting or subsequently spending a week scrawling the internet in order to tweek it, so i can of course squeze out a few more.

    Sorry about the rant i just woke up and saw this and was realy let down by it, all i can say to some up is not let this put you off it is an excellent game! and is extremely emersive, more so than almost any other game i have played, including GoW..

    /runs away

  • nightsparkle #72 5 years ago

    DEVELOPPERS NEED TIME TO PROGRAM FOR A NEW CONTROLSYSTEM LIKE THE WII REMOTE. you people are all thinking waaay to negatively. the only problem with call of duty 3 is that it needed a bigger bounding box.

    nintendo is selling realy well, and it seems they 'll be making the 6 million mark in only three months! it looks like its becomming one of the most populair consoles, if not the one and only! this means that there is a big market, and a lot of money to be made. meaning there will be an awfull lot more third party titles than with the N64 or the GC. with so much concurrence bad games would be losing money. so all those comments i'm reading, they're all just not realistic.



  • #73 5 years ago

    DEVELOPPERS NEED TIME TO PROGRAM FOR A NEW CONTROLSYSTEM LIKE THE WII REMOTE.

    Fwiw, have a look here - at least where FPS's are concerned:

    http://ww w.n-sider.com/articleview.php?a...

  • Muddtallica #74 5 years ago

    kangarootoo, MadMirko: I think you're right. I've actually kind of lost my thread a bit, because I think I was making two different points and then kind of got them confused. Ah well. :p

    Oh, and EuroSexMachine: come on, man. This comments page started with some bloody retarded faeces-slinging before developing into an actual discussion. Why lower the tone again?

  • manic_mouse #75 5 years ago

    5 is a very high score compared to what the text says. Heck, Kameo got a 5 and it's a pretty good game. Certainly not crippled and near-unplayable at any rate.

  • RE*AC*TOR #76 5 years ago

    This kind of shoddy development will turn people off future FPSs on the Wii.

    Its especially detrimental because Red Steel is being marketed so strongly.

  • Darren #77 5 years ago

    I saw the review score first and thought it was harsh until I realised it was for the inferior Wii version. Having read the review and played that version (albeit briefly) I'd have to agree with it completely.

    Yet ANOTHER mediocre Wii game! When will it end?

  • kangarootoo #78 5 years ago

    "Yet ANOTHER mediocre Wii game! When will it end?"

    With you reading the thread before posting? No, didn't think so.

  • Muddtallica #79 5 years ago

    manic_mouse: People have raised this point, and yeah, it does seem like that, but I've noticed EG put quite a bit of weight on innovation, or in this case, "credit for trying". CoD Wii is a game based on some very clever concepts and potentially great new ideas - they're just not implemented very well. Likewise, the Zelda review - and the Resistance one, if I remember right - seemed to suggest more a case of very good execution, but of not particularly groundbreaking ideas, so they got marked down.

    Though it does raise the interesting question of which to mark higher - a very innovative but poorly-executed game, or a well-made but very by-the-numbers game...

    And RE*AC*TOR - this is definitely a worry, especially with, as you say, Red Steel being such a high-profile disappointment...good job Metroid is coming quite early.

  • Artemis_Matsas #80 5 years ago

    Well, i got my Wii + Zelda last thursday, and i must say that although i am having fun with the console, i'm starting to get worried.
    The wii remote unfortunately is not THAT accurate.
    Except Zelda nothing else seems to be worthwhile playing. I WANT to buy another game for my Wii but now according to the reviews i'm reading i better hold on to my money.
    The Wii is a wonderful console, with a great WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor). So, dear developers, PLEASE stop farting around and give us decent games!!!

  • crazyhorse174 #81 5 years ago

    Apologies folks - I probably shouldnt have used examples of actual games in my point earlier (Oblivion, Halo, Final Fantasy, etc) or maybe I shouldve used less commercial examples.

    I suppose what I meant was, are people who play what I would refer to as "party games" going to be interested enough to want to play sports, role-playing, shooting, etc, etc, , type games?

    I suppose they could buy the system and solely buy it for its "quick fix" gaming, but in the end is that really using the console to its full potential? And therefore, does it actually have the potential to do these other genres well?

  • driptray #82 5 years ago


    To those: "Boo! Wii can't do FPS therefore it will fail" people, and also to those: "Ree! Wii will dominate in time!" people: get over it!

    Wii has already (imo) found a niche in the market. Even if it can never do FPS, it doesn't matter! Even if it can only do "non-serious" party games: It doesn't matter! Nintendo found a niche and exploited it. It works for me!

    If I want to play FPS, I'll do it on my xbox (or whatever) thank-you.

    If I want to play .. you know .. Wii-type games(!) I'll use my Wii.

    The two are not mutually exclusive: each system has its own merits. Equally, people will buy whatever they're drawn to, and that includes more than one console!

  • crazyhorse174 #83 5 years ago

    I should say as well - Im quite impressed by this discussion today!

    We sem to be having a decent, educated discussion here, without the interruptions of fanbiy rants! Superb!

    Keep up the good work folks! Maybe EG can become the Wii of the web and entice non-internet types that the web can be intellectual! :-)

  • crazyhorse174 #84 5 years ago

    @driptray

    Yes, but have they actually exploited a niche as you say, or is is simply a batch of gamers who want to try playing traditional genres of game in a different way, using a different control method?

  • Darren #85 5 years ago

    Fortunately I didn't buy the Wii for multiformat third-party games so I had no intention of buying Call of Duty 3 for it (I own the superior Xbox 360 version anyway). So long as Nintendo and the better third-parties churn out brilliant games that use the controller properly then I'll continue to buy games for the format.

    Still when you consider that mutliformat games make up most of a platform's games, it's a little disappointing that the Wii has so many weak games even at launch that don't use the controller properly... even Zelda doesn't use it that well in all honesty and that's a Nintendo game!

    If Nintendo want the Wii to be a success in the long-run then they'd better start ensuring that third-parties are using the system properly and that they release a steady stream of triple A "must-have" games for the system to prevent it going the same way as the GameCube, i.e. strong support initially followed by ailing third-party support and a lack of first-party releases eventually leading to drastically reduced sales and a lack of consumer interest.

  • varsas #86 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174: Perhaps you could read my reply? I think that the more complex games will appeal to those who pick up on Wii through it's party games. Everyone likes a good story and if the it's delivered with the right tone it will entice i.e. it needs to be involving but not difficult to play or require hours of training to master e.g. FPS-style games. I've already cited Zelda as being an perfect example; especially since some people have complained how easy combat is in the game.

  • driptray #87 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174

    Personally I think it's clear Nintendo have found a niche people want to buy into, simply because it's sold like gangbusters!

    Whether it's genuinely filling that niche is another matter, but from the number of comments I've read from people saying: "my mum/dad/pet rabbit have been playing wii sports and really love it!", I think it's here to stay!

  • #88 5 years ago

    Yet ANOTHER mediocre Wii game! When will it end?

    A few comments later:

    Fortunately I didn't buy the Wii for multiformat third-party games so I had no intention of buying Call of Duty 3 for it (I own the superior Xbox 360 version anyway).

    I see.

  • crazyhorse174 #89 5 years ago

    @varsas

    I did read your reply - my reply wasn't really squarely aimed at you - there were a couple fo other people who cited my points as examples in their posts - I just couldn't be bothered writing everyones names down!

    I agree with you that everyone (nearly everyone) likes a good story, but are the people who bought a Wii solely to jump around they're living room playing tennis, really interested in a story then? When you've come home from the pub after a few jars, with a couple of similarly drunk mates (Dont drink kids: its only for Adults :-), do you really want an engaging storyline? Or when Gran and Gramps come over for the holidays, are you really all going to sit around the telly playing the newest game, simply to find out what happens to the main character next? I dont think so, and if you do, then I seriously think you've got it wrong - either that or your family is the Waltons and actually enjoys one anothers company!

    And do you really think that FPS games require hours of training? Every one follows an identical route - point gun, pull trigger, shoot, move on and repeat as necessary. Not exactly brain surgery!

  • Darren #90 5 years ago

    Let's face it, if anyone is going to damage the Wii in the long-run, it's lazy third-party developers who shoehorn the Xbox/PS2 version of their game onto the Wii with passable support for its controller. That is going to make the Wii just look more dated and clumsy then it actually is.

    In an ideal world I'd love to see only first-party Nintendo and exclusive third-party games (like Elebits) on the Wii - lots of them, in fact - and not one single multiformat game like Call of Duty 3. With no inferior/lazy ports to show it up, the Wii would then be left to shine.

    Sadly that will never happen because, unfortunately, all consoles have a pre-dominantly multiformat games catalogue and the Wii will be no different. Ironically, it could be those games that end up damaging the machine's reputation in the long run if they aren't done properly as I'd personally rather play multiformat games on the PS3 or Xbox 360.

  • manic_mouse #91 5 years ago

    "I've noticed EG put quite a bit of weight on innovation, or in this case, "credit for trying"."

    Which is utterly ridiculous IMHO. If a game is bad then it deserves a bad score, no matter how innovative it is. If innovation WORKS and makes a gamer BETTER then go ahead and award points for it. Innovation for innovations sake is pointless, and praising games for it equally so. The review says that CoD3 on the Wii is a crippled game that is barely playable with the control scheme. Yet it gets the same score as a very solid game with no glaring issues.

    I think EG need to ditch the scores altogether and let the text do the talking.

  • Darren #92 5 years ago

    I'm looking forward to playing potential gems like Elebits, Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy and Trauma Centre among others and trying to remain positive (believe it or not). The inevitable Mario Tennis and Mario Golf spin-offs should be great fun with the Wiimote/Nunchuk combo, right?

    The GameCube was a superb little machine despite its (apparent) lack of popularity with the general public and hosted some damn fine games of which I still proudly own. If the Wii can match that then I'll be happy that I bought the machine.

    In the meantime I'll just avoid playing multiformat games on this format and pretend they don't exist... at least until some come along that are geniunely better to play on the Wii than the 360 or PS3.

  • SwedBear #93 5 years ago

    Some nice discussions here. Nice to be able to discuss the Wii withouth to many fanboys on either side.

    I'm still very undecided about the Wii. I got one but quite frankly it hasn't really hit the right nerve with me yet. Wii Sports is fun, zelda is ok but my overall feeling just is that I'm not sure where the Wii will end.

    I have similar thoughts like crazyhorse174 had earlier. Nintendo has themselves said they aim to get the non-gamers to play, just like they did with the DS. But I can't helpt to wonder if that will be enough. I know a few "non-gamers" that have gotten themselves a DS for Brain Training. The thing is, they haven't bought many, if any, other games. They are interested in a very narrow type of games and thus there are few games that interest them. I wonder if that is what can happen with the Wii to.

    And as a side note: I keep hearing Halleluja moments where people who never play games pick up a Wiimote and suddenly "love" gaming. I can tell you similar experience with Xbox Live arcade games and non-gamers where I've showed them those and people who usually never play suddenly can't stop playing. And I think most of us have had great party-gaming moments with both GC and PS2 games. It's the games behind that counts IMHO.

    I'm not completely sure I think that comparing the Wii to the DS is completely possible. While I have no problems seeing lots of non-gamers pick up a DS to play Brain-training on their way to work or in the bed at evenings (instead of making the crossword puzzles or the daily Soduko) I have a harder time seing the same people buy a Wii and play it when they come home from work on their TV. I think the accessibility (sp?) and cheap price is a key factor why the DS can succeed and something the Wii does not have.

    I hope that we will see some good games for the Wii though. I don't think the Wii itself will be enough for most gamers but I see it as the perfect companion for a 360 (or is it the other way around).

    Oh well. Lots of rambling. Nice review though. The score felt a bit high though for the tone of the review. Glad I didn't pick it up. Does anyone know when Trauma Center will be out for the Wii in Europe?

    /B

  • JediMasterMalik #94 5 years ago

    Isn't it telling that the only real Wii games people want come rom Nintendo themselves? You know, what everyone knew would be good anyway? It just doesn't seem that the Wii has alot of effective 3rd party support, it's either a party game, or rubbish. Of course we'll have to wait and see if this remains the case by next year. Hopefully, it won't. Though I doubt it'll make a huge difference to Ninty, they've already made a truck load of cash. Whether thay gain marketshare or not, they will still make a profit.

  • Sid-Nice #95 5 years ago

    I think that the Wii version of COD3 is a really bad port. The game is more of a battle against the controls than the Halliwell's.

    First off the graphics are a disgrace, no 480p? The game runs in 16.9 but on loading COD3 my TV jumps to standard screen from 480p. I did state in a thread on the E/G forum concerning multi-platform releases that "After playing COD2 on the Xbox 360 only a fool would buy the Wii version of COD3" Well I'm that fool. To say that "I'm disappointed with the game" would be an understatement; 2 questions come to mind after playing Cod3.......

    1) What are the graphical capabilities of the Hollywood GPU?
    2) Do the Wii controls work?

    It’s good to see that this review has brought the anti-Wii boo boys out in force; with their defeatist attitude that the Wii is just a gimmick. Nintendo need to sort out these poor turd party releases. Games like Avatar, Monster 4X4, GT Pro and Rampage are ports of old Cube titles; these games (which were shit first time around) should be released on a budget label, yet the video games companies are charging full price. Nintendo in their quest for third party support are being shafted. So the gamer is being raped by the COD of the goat.

    If you persevere with Wii COD3 you will get some satisfaction from the game; my conclusion is, if the Wii-mote was around back then “We would have lost the war.” :(

  • varsas #96 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174: I'm pretty sure you asked if people who get into Wii due to the party games will want to get the latest conventional games or have I got that wrong? My answer to this question is a resounding yes.

    I'm not sure why you ask the question of playing a story driven game with a group of people gathered; that isn't what I was saying at all. With a group of people the Wii is perfect due to the mini games that are coming out. When alone I think the "new" gamers will look at what else is available due to the lack of depth in the mini games. The "new" gamers will appreciate more conventional games with strong story or action elements assuming it is accessible.

    On the question of FPS games, it does take time to be good at them. I think you've oversimplified the description of FPS especially since combined strafing and shooting with accuracy requires some skill; you've also got to memorize maps, remembering locations of key items, choke points etc...

  • space_ace #97 5 years ago

    a frustrating and barely controllable mess

    this is war, son! what did you expect?!

  • kangarootoo #98 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174

    Someone mentioned rts games earlier, and that is the sort of game that could move less hardcore gamers over to the Wii. My parents play loads of the old Caesar and Pharoah games. Imagine that sort of thing on your TV with a wiimote control system. Top banana.

  • Shinji #99 5 years ago

    The review says that CoD3 on the Wii is a crippled game that is barely playable with the control scheme. Yet it gets the same score as a very solid game with no glaring issues.

    The review also notes that CoD3 is still a really excellent, brilliantly designed, intense and atmospheric WWII game - the sole factors which stack up against it are the control system (which is a major negative point that makes the game much less fun than it should be, albeit not actually unplayable in any way) and the lack of multiplayer, which is present on other versions.

    Given that, I think five is a fair score. I didn't review Kameo, but I also agree with the score for that game - unlike CoD3, which is excellent in some regards and dire in others, Kameo was simply utterly mediocre across the board, in my view. That merits average scores for both games, but for quite different reasons.

  • kangarootoo #100 5 years ago

    Since when did "party game" become a rude word (or two). I think that games which people only play when their friends pop round are in no way inferior to long story driven games that you can sink a weekend into.

    Some people will buy a Wii, buy a few "lite" games and only play them once or twice a month with friends. But the existence of these games doesn't prevent other devs providing content for other more conventional tastes. I'm sure Ninty are happy to have everyone's money, and the more games that get made the more attractive an industry it becomes for investors, which (hopefully) means a higher quality of product, which is good for all of us.

  • #101 5 years ago

    the sole factors which stack up against it are the control system (which is a major negative point that makes the game much less fun than it should be, albeit not actually unplayable in any way)

    It would be interesting to see how someone who's never played FPS on a dual analogue set-up would take to the wii controls.

    There's a palpable sense of "how would this work on 2 analog sticks" and "this is not as intutive as 2 analog sticks". Why? Well, reviewers are pretty hardcore, they've been gaming on several dozen console FPS ever since Dual shock emerged 10 years ago.

    There's a definte learning curve to Wii FPS, but, to me, it feels like in order to accomplish that you have to unlearn some of the dual analog FPS habits that you've been accustomed to. If that makes sense.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 14:15

  • Rambaldi #102 5 years ago

    It's amusing hearing the "wait till the Wii arrives it'll blow everything out of the next-gen waters" crew backtracking to "give it a year - you'll see".

    Virtual Boy 2 anyone?

  • Der_tolle_Emil #103 5 years ago

    Party games do work. Just look at some of the later PS2 games. Singstar etc. did quite well if I remember correctly.

  • Sid-Nice #104 5 years ago

    Rambaldi, are you an irritating little shit is real life or just on here?

  • Dermoth #105 5 years ago

    That's it! It's all over for the Wii! The failure of an Activision port to live up to expectations means the console is DOOMED!

    Funny how this thread's had twice as many comments as, fr'instance, Rayman, isn't it?

  • #106 5 years ago

    That's it! It's all over for the Wii! The failure of an Activision port to live up to expectations means the console is DOOMED!

    I see where you're coming from but, you know, the Big N has acquired this reputation of the lack of 3rd party support since the N64 days. In other words, gamers are justifiably wondering if this is a harbinger of things to come.

  • rudedudejude #107 5 years ago

    Lazy ass devs if you ask me, rushing for a launch release.

  • Dermoth #108 5 years ago

    "I see where you're coming from but, you know, the Big N has acquired this reputation of the lack of 3rd party support since the N64 days. In other words, gamers are justifiably wondering if this is a harbinger of things to come."

    I'm not sure it is justifiable, though. Kileak The Blood didn't provide a particularly accurate guide to the future of FPS games on the PS1, for instance.

    Silly, silly people.
    Edited by 2 at 18/12/06 @ 14:33

  • crazyhorse174 #109 5 years ago

    @Kangarootoo

    Yeah, RTS style games could work really well! Up until Lord of the Rings: BFME2, companies had pondered over how to get the controls properly mapped to a joypad in a way that would be enjoyable - the Wiimote (I still feel daft writing that word!) would make it a better experience! Top banana indeed! :-)

    @varsas

    Yes, I did ask that question. I appreciate that you are entitled to your opinion. I'm just not as optimistic as you seem to be. If people flock to play party-games on the Wii, I just dont see how that is going to persuade them to play any other type of game. If thats the type of game they bought/played the system for, then thats what they are most likely to want to continue playing. Isnt there a saying that goes along the lines of "If you feed a kid candy, they'll want more candy tomorrow" (or something like that - or maybe I just made that up!)

    What I'm saying is, I'm not convinced just now. I reckon they're could be some cracking games on it - probably developed by Nintendo as has been said - but it'll take a bit of time for them to filter through, and whether or not people will have just given up by then, drowning in a sea of Wii Sports-like titles, will remain to be seen.

    I do think Nintendo could do with moving away from all of the regualar franchises that they make from their systems (Mario, Metroid, etc) and try and do something a bit different. Yes, they inevetibly end up good - making me eat my words - but it does make them look like a one-trick pony!

  • spongebob #110 5 years ago

    You know, a lot of people STILL play a lot of EyeToy and SingStar games on PS2. And some of them probably don't play anything else on it. But then again PS2 has the widest library of games on every console ever whereas Nintendo has pretty slim one on even it's newest champion, DS.

  • cooper #111 5 years ago

    @Spongebob: Exactly!

  • kangarootoo #112 5 years ago

    @Rambaldi

    Oh just go and play in the road or something.

    ;)

  • J*C #113 5 years ago

    The wii is doomed!

  • ruckus #114 5 years ago

    It's pretty simple people - CoD3 isn't a very good Wii game. That is all.

  • varsas #115 5 years ago

    @crazyhorse174: Perhaps I am being optimistic that new gamers will transition to conventional games but considering the fact that they have bought the machine I don't think it's a stretch that they would take a look at what else is available besides the party games. I think that curiosity can lead to some of that group taking up more easily accessible conventional games but we'll only know over time.

  • jmctavish #116 5 years ago

    These are launch games, people.

    Publishers are just out to make a quick, easy buck.

    There's plenty of good stuff to come for the Wii.

  • kangarootoo #117 5 years ago

    My bloody grapes aren't ripe!!

    I've never been let down by M&S before. There is ahcnage in the air. Jesus, maybe the Wii really IS doomed.

    Edit: in my fury I mixed up the latters in one of the above words. Lets make a competition of it. The first person to work out what the secret word is can have an unripe grape.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 15:08

  • crazyhorse174 #118 5 years ago

    @varsas

    True - we'll all just have to wait and see!

  • bloodflowers #119 5 years ago

    I wonder if we'll see DS Mk 2 overall. That is - we'll see the big name hits and platform seller types, and we'll see lots of reduced quality versions of games on the other systems, with slight nods to the Wiimote, mostly crap.

    The really interesting games which are designed to use the Wiimote (or DS touchscreen), will end up getting Japanese release only. This is why my DS collection is 80% Japanese games. God knows why, but some of the very best titles on that platform simply don't appear outside of Japan, presumably because Nintendo Europe (or whoever) has decided that we want ports of Cars instead.

  • jmctavish #120 5 years ago

    I'm still off the opinion that the people who dislike this and Red Steel are generally shit at games.

    They are by no means easy to control but when it clicks it feels great.

    Obviously the presentation could be improved a bit but you can't expect the world at launch.

  • crazyhorse174 #121 5 years ago

    "...presumably because Nintendo Europe (or whoever) has decided that we want ports of Cars instead."

    If you'd rather have a car port, as opposed to ports of cars, go to these guys! :-)

    <a>http://www.diycarports. co.uk
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 15:20

  • kangarootoo #122 5 years ago

    @jmctavish

    "I'm still off the opinion that the people who dislike this and Red Steel are generally shit at games."

    Christ, this old macho angle again. The customers pays money to be entertained, not tested. Being "good at games" is nothing to be proud of, its not even likely to get you more sex.

    The control system should not be a challenge, end of story, thats my personal law. If a game takes effort before it stops 'being annoying' then it is broken and there is always something else on the shelf that can take its place.

  • bushwod #123 5 years ago

    Reading the review for Red Steel suggests you can control FPS's with the wii, but clearly there is some way to go before it's cracked. However this is a whole new control system and it seems a little harsh to expect the launch titles to work amazingly. I mean when did a console last launch with more than maybe 1 good game?

    I still remember when FPS's where the domain of PC only, then GoldenEye and later Halo came and proved consoles could do it too. Still it took a good few years for the dual analogue standards to mature.

    Incidentally even if Zelda, Mario and Metroid turn out to be the only good games for the wii I'm still happy to get it.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 15:26

  • Skooch #124 5 years ago

    "the sort of thing which seems like a good idea when you write it down, but which clearly doesn't work terribly well in real life"

    Sums up the Wii in one sentence.

  • crazyhorse174 #125 5 years ago

    "Incidentally even if Zelda, Mario and Metroid turn out to be the only good games for the wii I'm still happy to get it."

    Is it worth forking out Ł170 odd, plus Ł40 a pop for 3 games?

    This is why Nintendo need to make up some more IP's. Or they need to work alongside 3rd party developers to try and improve the quality of games released.

    Yes, their own games are good - nay, great. But when the level of 3rd party games on their systems is so poor, then it reduces the number of reasons for buying the machine.

    I mean, come on. We can practically guarantee that there will be a Metroid game, a Zelda game, a Pokemon game a handful of Mario titles, and maybe even a Starfox one as well. Not very imaginitive.

    Everyone accuses EA of using "cash cows" to make money, but when it comes down to it, Nintendo do the exact same thing - cept for some reason because its Nintendo, everyone just thinks its ok.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 15:47

  • jmctavish #126 5 years ago

    You are such a cock, kangarootoo.

    Some people like a challenge in a game. Why do you thiink Ikaruga is so popular? It's becuase it's bastard hard and people gain satisfaction from games like that.

    You should just watch a DVD if you don't want to be tested.

    Fucking Mong.


  • driptray #127 5 years ago

    @jmctavish : whoa there! Uncalled for: chill out.

  • PameBoy #128 5 years ago

    What I'm amazed by is the fact that there are 127 comments on this article, and only 2 or 3 people seem to have actually played the game. Furthermore, I haven't seen *anybody* really question the quality of the review, which is, let me tell you, highly questionable.

    I think CoD3 on the Wii is an excellent game. The controls, though they took all of 5 minutes to get used to after a minor bit of flailing around, are fast, fluid and precise and I never once found myself longing for analogue sticks or, for that matter, a mouse. In fact, having got used to the fluid motion of the Wiimote controls, I don't think I ever want to go back to playing FPS on slow, clunky, imprecise analogue sticks. The graphics, despite being clearly inferior to the 360 and PS3 releases, were at least functional and never distractingly bad. The scripting and pacing of the game itself was of a predictably excellent standard for the series.

    The only gripes I have with the game are to do with the ridiculous tacked-on minigame sections involving placing an explosive charge or operating the levers of a crane. These are dreadfully unresponsive and awkward and frankly the game would have been better without them. The driving sections, however, are great fun and the infamous gun-wrestling melee sections are tense and work well.

    I am not convinced that the reviewer has actually played the entire game - it sounds to me like he just couldn't become accustomed to the controls for some reason, got frustrated and wrote an angry review, then realised what he'd done and gave it a slightly better (though still very harsh) score. Now everyone on here is convinced it's a bad game.

    I am not a fanboy. I simply urge everybody to try something out before you slag it off, or blindly take a reviewer's opinion for gospel truth. Like any innovation, it might take a couple of minutes of getting used to but I'd urge everyone to at least try it out, you'll be letting yourself down if you don't. If you look at the reviews on every other site, CoD3 has been mostly given a much more fair 7/10 on average, and it's one of the best Wii launch titles alongside Zelda an Monkeyball. My opinion. Peace

  • bushwod #129 5 years ago

    "Everyone accuses EA of using "cash cows" to make money, but when it comes down to it, Nintendo do the exact same thing - cept for some reason because its Nintendo, everyone just thinks its ok."

    Probably because Nintendo's franchises are consistently of such a high quality and excellent design.

    You're right though, they need a new IP that makes real use of the controller.

  • #130 5 years ago

    it sounds to me like he just couldn't become accustomed to the controls for some reason, got frustrated and wrote an angry review

    Excellent counter-argument PameBoy!

    To me, it also sounds like a sense of frustration of the controls on the part of the reviewer

  • guvner #131 5 years ago

    "The wii remote unfortunately is not THAT accurate."

    Precisely (pardon the pun.) From my experiences of the Wiimote any subtleties of movement I tried didn't come through in the games, and sometimes my movements beared little relation at all to how the games were interpreting them. For me, that's the worrying thing about the Wii medium-long term, beyond these rubbish initial releases. That no matter how good a game is, the Wiimote actually isn't all that precise.

    "Someone mentioned rts games earlier, and that is the sort of game that could move less hardcore gamers over to the Wii."

    Ugh. Controlling an RTS game with the Wiimote's lack of accuracy? That sounds horrible. And any effort to simplify mechanics so that such an RTS game wouldn't require such precision, well, that's just dumbing games down as lots of the hardcore types are already complaining about with the current games.

  • Muddtallica #132 5 years ago

    jmctavish: Woah, easy there, man! I did think that kangarootoo was a bit overly aggressive in responding to you in the first place, but that's fairly extreme. In any case, I think you misunderstand his point. Difficulty in games is fine if we're talking about a game designed to be difficult and challenging, like Ikaruga or Gradius. If the game is difficult because the control is poorly calibrated, or the scripting is duff, or the camera is rubbish, then that's a flaw in the game, and it's the reviewer's duty to point it out. That's not to say you can't still enjoy them - I enjoyed Sonic Adventure once I got to grips with its niggles, but I wouldn't pretend it was anything other than hugely flawed.

    Also, on the "cash cow" issue - Nintendo does produce a lot of sequels, but so does every company; the industry is founded on franchises. The challenge is to find new ways of making the sequel fresh, exciting, and innovative to keep the series relevant; the point that you stop doing that, and start just making churning out identikit sequels to turn a quick buck, is the point that a series becomes a cash cow. Nintendo don't do it often (Pokemon spin-offs and Mario Party aside), whereas EA do, regularly...

  • varsas #133 5 years ago

    @guvner:

    Ugh. Controlling an RTS game with the Wiimote's lack of accuracy? That sounds horrible. And any effort to simplify mechanics so that such an RTS game wouldn't require such precision, well, that's just dumbing games down as lots of the hardcore types are already complaining about with the current games.

    From experience of Wii Play and reviews of Trauma Centre I think the use of the Wiimote as a pointer is very accurate so I don't see why it wouldn't work for an RTS.

    The inaccurate control that's been mentioned has been w.r.t. FPS controls i.e. the bound box set up. With an RTS you use the nunchuk to move the map and the remote to select items etc..
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 16:26

  • crazyhorse174 #134 5 years ago

    "Probably because Nintendo's franchises are consistently of such a high quality and excellent design."

    Heh heh - yeah I'll give you that one. Should've thought of thatbefore I started typing!

  • kangarootoo #135 5 years ago

    @jmctavish

    Very witty, well done.

    I absolutely support people who want a challenge in a game. If thats what they like then thats just fine.

    I don't support people telling others they "must be shit at games" like its some kind of insult. If you are 14 years old then it might well be a good insult. For an adult its just wanking contest material and it should be beneath you.

    "You should just watch a DVD if you don't want to be tested"

    Thats exactly what I am talking about. "if you don't want to be tested", grow up.

    Do you not see how patronising your original post was? Of course, my response was patronising also, but I'm a fight fire with fire kind of person sometimes.

    I shall refrain from ending my post in the same manner you ended yours. The fact you got so riled so quickly is reward enough thanks.

  • kangarootoo #136 5 years ago

    @jmctavish

    Ok, I courted anger a bit and I apologise. I just have a real issue with people championing difficulty in games as some kind of test of manhood.

    The guy that led Ninja Gaiden peeves me for the very same reason. His reaction to complaints that the game was too hard was "they should stop complaining and fight". Jesus, what a dick.

    Edit addition. Jaffe peeves me for the same reason (though I'm sure he's a nice guy in many other ways). Quote "I didn't care whether anyone else would like it or not, I just made the game I wanted to play". If I was his manager, we would be having a chat (the fact GoW turned out well is not an excuse, and in fact he may have just been blowing off rather than saying what he really thought).

    One of my major bug bears in development is when people only focus on the game they would want to play themselves. If you work on making games for a living, disregarding your customer is unprofessional, simple as that.

    So I have some history of bad feeling when difficulty is used as an elitist flag, and you happened to wander into my line of fire, thus getting more than your fair share of grumpiness. I never delete posts, so the previous one to this will have to stand.

    You still need to chill out though.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 16:38

  • guvner #137 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: "The customers pays money to be entertained, not tested. The control system should not be a challenge..."

    Speak for yourself.

    If *YOU* want to be entertained not tested, fine (though as jmctavish says perhaps DVD is more your thing.) But personally, *I* want to be tested with games. I want to play CoD2 on Veteran to have the satisfaction of surviving until the end. I want the PES control system to be a challenge so when I score a great goal it's due to my skill. Etc.

    Less of the "The customers pays money to be entertained, not tested" sweeping statements if you please Sir.

  • AcidSnake #138 5 years ago

    But surely if you like being tested that's entertainment to you?

  • kangarootoo #139 5 years ago

    @guvner

    I might suggest, at the risk of putting words into your mouth, that you want to be tested because you find that entertaining. If you found the testing experience to be utterley dull or frustrating, would you still appreciate it?

    And with regard to a control system, the controls are surely there to let you interact with the game. Once that interaction takes place, then the entertainment can begin. If the very control system is difficult to use, how is that a good thing? For example, Halo has seemless controls, which allows you to have fun in combat. Far Cry on 360 had bloody awful controls, which stopped you gettibng involved in the game and having fun.

    I don't think I worded things very well. Let me put it another way.

    Being entertained (having fun, being thrilled, whatever you want to call it) is at the top of the pyramid. Everything else serves that. So challenge is only good if its fun, realistic AI is only good if its fun, open ended missions are only good if they are fun.

    I mean, if a game isn't fun, what point is there to anything else (other than self flagelation I suppose, and that is the attitude that I can't identify with).

  • kangarootoo #140 5 years ago

    Anyway, this thread has been really good so far and I don't want to stuff it up. Apologies to jmctavish, the fault was mine, as previously mentioned my grapes weren't ripe and it just drove me mental for a minute there.

  • crazyhorse174 #141 5 years ago

    Being tested in a game is all good and well, but what fun is it if you are tested so much that you get so frustrated that you cant advance in a game to find out what happens next.

    I'm with Kangarootoo on this - I play games to relax. If I wanted tested, I'd go out and play sports or join the army or something. Games are a form of entertainment - not masochism.

    Or do you play the games on the highest level, just so you can tell people that you played it through on the highest level? Bragging rights, sort of thing?

  • guvner #142 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: "Quote "I didn't care whether anyone else would like it or not, I just made the game I wanted to play". If I was his manager, we would be having a chat"

    I kinda liked that attitude he had personally. Analogies would be a musician making music he himself wanted to listen to, a director making movies he wanted to watch, etc. What's wrong with that?

    People making something creative they themselves wouldn't play, listen, watch, or whatever, well isn't that just doing a job to make a buck and pay the rent?

  • old_skool #143 5 years ago

    On a side note , does this game make you tired like wii sports ? After playing Time Crises for 30 minutes my arm felt like jelly . Does the wiimote have the same effect ?

  • guvner #144 5 years ago

    "I'm with Kangarootoo on this"

    I was only pointing out not to make sweeping statements about what everybody wants, not that one train of thought is right on the whole entertained/tested discussion. We all want different things from games of course. And Kangarootoo explained his reasoning rationally, so fair play to all concerned. :)

  • manic_mouse #145 5 years ago

    Shinji: "The review also notes that CoD3 is still a really excellent, brilliantly designed, intense and atmospheric WWII game"

    Then why didn't the 360/PS3 versions get a better score, if the game is so brilliant? It just doesn't add up: A 7/10 game with far worse graphics, multiplayer removed and a completely broken control scheme = 5/10?

    Honestly EG, just get rid of the scores at the end of the reviews. We'll all be much better off. Your reviews are always a brilliant read, so why not leave it at that?
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 17:13

  • Muddtallica #146 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: Gosh, I'm talking to you a lot lately. I think what you're trying to say is that challenge is all well and good, as long as you're being by a cunning game design or well programmed enemy AI routines (ie, intentional design), rather than poor controls, niggly camera or buggy handling (ie, poor programming)?

    Also - making a game that you yourself would enjoy isn't disregarding your customer. If I wanted to craft something that I wanted other people to enjoy, the first thing I would ask myself is: do I enjoy this? If the answer is yes, then it's pretty safe to assume that others will too. I mean, what's the alternative? Make something that you yourself DON'T enjoy, but you think others might? That doesn't make sense...
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 17:00

  • kangarootoo #147 5 years ago

    @guvner

    Its not an either or situation, you can be driven by a passion for something and trust your instict but if your job involves being given a brief and creating a product to fit that brief, then to go off on your own road completely (as his quote suggested, though like I said, I'm not sure if he really meant it) is to not be doing your job.

    For example, user testing gets used all the time in game dev (actually not all the time, but far more games would avoid being bobbins if it was). You take a bunch of people who represent your target audience, you let them try out the game, and you find out what problems they had.

    I know it sounds cold, but I really not suggesting that to respond to feedback is to lose all passion for what you do. I just think that accounting for the requirements of the customer is a basic part of being a professional developer. Imagine the outcry if a dev turned up on a suggestion board manned by fans of a game and said "I don't care what you say, you are getting the game I want to play, balls to what you want".

    I think at the heart of my ranting on the subject is the inherent feeling that the games industry is still learning to walk in many ways. Truth is, we make mistakes that other industries stopped making years ago, and its frustrating to see it happen sometimes. The games companies that consistently make good titles are not doing so because they are all geniuses shooting from the hip (though they are likely also very experienced and quite clever), they are doing so because they have processes in place that remove the random elements from what they do.

    Venting over :)

  • kangarootoo #148 5 years ago

    @Muddtallica

    "making a game that you yourself would enjoy isn't disregarding your customer"

    I think it is if that is the only guide you use. I'm probably presenting it in a overly monochromatic fashion, which isn't helping the discussion I'm sure.

    Anyway, see my comment above about user testing. Open beta tests are the same thing. They aren't just to find bugs, but also to get feedback from people who are interested in the game.

    Its the attitude of the quote that riled me too. The process can be discussed forever, but someone saying "I don't care" is pretty clear cut in my book. I would say that getting and responding to feedback is being respectful to your gamers, and that saying "I don't care what they think" is kind of insulting really.

  • PameBoy #149 5 years ago

    "On a side note , does this game make you tired like wii sports ?"

    Nope. Apart from a couple of energetic bits like the close combat minigame, it's all just subtle wrist movements. I gotta say though, I really like going nuts on the Wii tennis or boxing and getting tired out. Makes me feel like I'm actually doing something and getting some exercise instead of sitting on my ass and vegging out. Anyway to be honest, no offense and I'm not judging or anything, but frankly, if anybody does get really tired playing a videogame for 20 mins... I gotta say I think they need to get some exercise. Not that I'm in particularly great shape or anything... just saying.

  • old_skool #150 5 years ago

    Thanks Pameboy . I do like to sit on the couch and chill after a hectic day at work, but to balance things out I play Dancing Stage Max and DDR twice a week for 2 hours .Saves me from going to the gym :-)

  • old_skool #151 5 years ago

    Hah ! I just realised that I play Dancing Stage not to be entertained nor to be challenged . How novel !

  • kangarootoo #152 5 years ago

    Getting tired is not a bad thing perse. I believe that shagging can be quite tiring if you are doing it right, but that has never been enough of a disinsentiviser to give it a bad name :)

  • smelly #153 5 years ago

    @Kanga : LOL!

    Nehuws..

    Me decided on weekend to sell my wii for a profit to a loving family then buy one again in a years time when the price has come down and there's more games I want on it.

    I broke my rule of waiting until there were at least 5 games I wanted before buying a new console.. Just like i'm (still) doing with the 360.

  • onyxbox #154 5 years ago

    in time I believe that with enough numbers out there, developers will be focused by publishers to think of new things that we can play in new ways and it's a shame that only Wii Sports demonstrates this currently.

    I remember getting the DS and there was really nothing for it for months! Then Nintendogs (which didn't appeal to me) arrived, the DS exploded into mainstream and Brain Training just secured that position and as a consequence I can now play a whole job load of great and original games on my DS.

    If I was a publisher now I'd be trying to find the next Nintendogs (whatever it may be) for the Wii.

    BTW: I played COD3 (on Wii) and although I wouldn't choose it over the 360 version, I found the controls to be fine, in fact the only thing I found annoying was having to spider finger my way up the Wiimote to throw grenades and on the whole I found the Wii aiming thing added an element of immersion I didn't feel on 360.





  • smelly #155 5 years ago

    Sorry.. just read this whole thread... and saw this:


    kangarootoo: "The customers pays money to be entertained, not tested. The control system should not be a challenge..."

    Speak for yourself.


    Right.. So if I made a game where none of the controls did what you expected them to do.. I.e. If you press up, the character might move left.. then again he might move right and die in a pit of fire.

    That'd be challenging.. Would it be fun?


    But I'm at awe as to most of these posts.. "I'm a sony fanboy.. im pissed off that another machine is getting loads of mediocre games.. boo hoo", etc etc
    :-)

  • secombe #156 5 years ago

    Madden made the transition to the Wii just fine (brilliantly, in fact) and that is the definition of a multi-format game. If the game suits the control methods employed by the Wii then great, but if the Wii controls are shoe-horned in to a "normal" game then of course it could all go horribly wrong. It will be interesting to see how a "soccer" game does on the Wii.

    For what it's worth I'm actually enjoying CoD3 on the Wii...and I've never liked or got on with the control mechanics of console FPS games so gave up playing them very early on, but the Wii FPS controls seem very natural and easy, I'm wondering what all the fuss is about actually.
    Edited by 1 at 18/12/06 @ 17:42

  • PameBoy #157 5 years ago

    @ kangarootoo

    you damn right. I'm just saying you oughta be able to last more than 20 minutes ;)

  • dllord #158 5 years ago

    I got my Wii for Nintendo games and a few other party games, I've got my 360 for FPS and all the other games that i like! This is the way people should be thinking when it comes to buying a Wii!

  • smelly #159 5 years ago

    remember getting the DS and there was really nothing for it for months!

    Same as any console launch.. It's taken over a year for the 360 to get more than a couple of games I actually want to buy/play.

  • smelly #160 5 years ago

    @dllord : Disagree.. FPS games are perfectly suited to the wii controller.. it's just that no-one has done it right yet.

    Personally I think they should ignore the "pointing at the screen" stuff, and just use the controllers tilt mechanism to treat it as a mouse... That'd work really well imho.

  • PameBoy #161 5 years ago

    Well I'd say that's how people ought to think when it comes to gaming in general, not just the Wii. To be honest, Wii is the only 'next-gen' system I own so far - I might get a 360 one day but it'll have to have a few more diverse games than "Gritty Space Marine Shooter 9" before I become interested in it. I'm still going through a load of PS2 games I bought ages ago and never got around to playing.

  • guvner #162 5 years ago

    smelly: "Right.. So if I made a game where none of the controls did what you expected them to do.. I.e. If you press up, the character might move left.. then again he might move right and die in a pit of fire. That'd be challenging.. Would it be fun?"

    No, those controls would be "shit", not "challenging".

    "Challenging" controls would be, say, the multitude of different skills to master in PES, or Soul Calibur 2, or a number of other games with great depth to the control system. Those controls are "challenging", not the retarded example you created to attempt to prove a point.

  • bushwod #163 5 years ago

    @guvner

    Controls shouldn't be challenging, they should be intuitive. Full stop.

    Any game designer knows this. It's what you then do with those controls in the game that should be challenging.

    That’s why consoles are more popular than PC's, because consumers understand game pads easier than a keyboard with 128 keys. Hence why the wii has been designed to appeal to non gamers who are afraid of the modern controller.

  • kangarootoo #164 5 years ago

    @guvner

    We are roving into the murkey waters of Lake Semantic Argument here.

    The review in question suggested that the controls of CoD3 (rightly or wrongly) were simply shit. The suggestion was then raised that they were simply challenging. So that is more a discussion of the quality of said controls, rarther than disagreement opn whether controls that are shit is a good thing (surely we would agree, it is not).

    Also, I would suggest that with something like Soul Calibur, the controls aren't challenging, rather it is the combination in which they used which provides the challenge. I never played Soul Calibur and found the controls unresponsive or inaccurate, I simply found I wasn't very good at the fighting part. But anyway, split hairs lie ahead on this path. Lets just agree that shit controls are bad, and we can then maybe argue about whether CoD3 had shit controls.

  • smelly #165 5 years ago

    @guvnor:

    "No, those controls would be "shit", not "challenging". "


    .. And according to this review.. COD3's controlls are "shit" not "challenging".

    So sounds like you're finally agreeing :)

  • secombe #166 5 years ago

    "Controls shouldn't be challenging, they should be intuitive. Full stop."

    This is precisely where I'm at with CoD3, I could never grasp the whole dual-analogue thing with console FPS games, but the Nunchuk/Remote combo seems incredibly simple and intuitive, you don't even need to think about it, just point and go.

    Sure the grenade controls are rubbish, but 95% of the time I'm finding the game a joy to play.

  • Sid-Nice #167 5 years ago

    Multi-format games will to have to offer something special for gamers to purchase a title for the Wii over the Xbox 360 and PS3 build. We'll be able to tell how lazy the development teams are when the Wii's online facilities are in place; if there aren’t any online functions in Wii ports, what will they use as an excuse? The team had to concentrate on the control system and they didn’t have time to add any online features?

    Nintendo haven’t got that many rabbits to pull out of the hat when it comes down to first party titles; they need third party support for the Wii to survive. Games like Avatar, Monster 4X4 World Circuit, Far Cry, Splinter Cell DA, GT Pro Series and Rampage Total Destruction; could actually send the Wii to an early grave. The Wii needs quality over content; I think gamers would rather wait for a half decent game than be fed a boat load of shit at the consoles launch. There was very little crap that got through the net when Nintendo home consoles were cartridge based (very little third party support too) but Nintendo had an excellent QC policy back in the good old days.

    The Wii can’t match the Xbox 360 or PS3 on the graphics front; so the controls need to be finely tuned, especially when it is the controls that make the Wii different. I bought an Xbox 360 for PC graphics in my living room and I bought the Wii for fun; both consoles have delivered. Hopefully the Wii will get some good third party games in the near future; but in all honesty Nintendo haven’t actually lead the way with Zelda, Wii Play and Wii Sports being the only European first party titles so far. These games do however prove that the Wii remote works.

  • secombe #168 5 years ago

    Sid, EA seem to be doing fine based on their first title. In fact Madden is regarded as superior on the Wii despite the obvious loss of graphical quality. It's good to know that it can be done when applied to the right sort of game.

  • guvner #169 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: "But anyway, split hairs lie ahead on this path. Lets just agree that shit controls are bad"

    Absolutely, at no stage was I implying that shit controls are in any way good, even to present an unintended challenge to a game. Simply, that *I* prefer a lot of depth to controls and the challenge presented by mastering them, and took issue with your comment that customers just want to be entertained. Each to his own and all that; personally I prefer to be tested and know I reached the end because I overcame the challenge the game presented.

    "and we can then maybe argue about whether CoD3 had shit controls."

    I've played CoD3 on the Wii, for the first 3 levels (I've finished it on the 360.) I could much more reliably hit enemies with a dual analog sticks. Maybe that's because I'm used to dual analogs, maybe the CoD3 devs didn't cook up a good enough control system, maybe because it's a lazy port, maybe the Wii remote isn't particularly accurate at the end of the day, or maybe for some other reason. But for a console that counts its supposed ability to make the control system more transparent as one of its few aces over the PS3 and 360 it can't be good that the Wii controls aren't even the preferred control scheme.

  • smelly #170 5 years ago

    >The Wii needs quality over content;

    Sorry, you're wrong. You're thinking from a "hardcore" gaming nerd perspective.

    Joe public just see's "lots of games = choice = better system".

    Having lots of poor quality games, with worse graphics than the competition did NOTHING to harm ps2 sales.. It sold on the back of having LOTS of games available for it.

  • Shinji #171 5 years ago

    To me, it also sounds like a sense of frustration of the controls on the part of the reviewer

    Whatever else about my gaming prowess may be brought into question in this thread (and frankly, anyone who is arguing about gaming skill levels in a thread about a Wii game has clearly missed the whole point of the console), I can at least agree with that sentence. The negative review IS down to my frustration with the controls - I spent this entire game fighting not against the German army, but against the control system, and that's now how games should be, in my estimation.

    However, I would like to reiterate that I do mean the *entire* game. While we may not always see eye to eye on scores and so on (a review is one person's opinion, etc etc etc), one of the nice things about EG is the insistence on playing a game thoroughly before reviewing.

    Admittedly that becomes less of a positive when reviewing Sonic 360, but I guess you can't win 'em all :)

  • PameBoy #172 5 years ago

    I agree in that anyone "arguing" about gaming skill levels wants a Wiimote to the brain. What I find more interesting is that you spent the entire game battling against controls that myself and seemingly quite a few other people got used to in 10 minutes and spent the rest of the game having a blast.

    I'm thinking this is simply symptomatic of a new peripheral hitting the mainstream -there's a lot of talk about developers trying to figure out how to use the remote to make good games, just as there was with the DS and even the N64's introduction of the analogue stick - but it seems there will also be a period required for the players themselves to become accustomed with how to get into a new control scheme, especially for genres they're already very used to playing the old way.

  • onyxbox #173 5 years ago

    Anyway, I found that the Wiimote is most accurate if it's at most two or three meters away from the "sensor bar", any farther and a lot of games become fiddly (some almost unplayable).

    Yes the wii is fine when I'm about 1 to 2 meters from the TV it's pinpoint accurate.

  • oerhoert #174 5 years ago

    There is, of course a "sensitivity" option on the machine, which I believe makes it possible to sit further away from the sensor bar while playing. Have you tried adjusting that?

    As for the game, I've had little trouble adjusting to the controls myself, Shinji, even though I believe you were genuinely troubled.

    My issues with the game are a whole different kettle of fish, and revolve mainly around the way it seems to be almost no silent periods, only action, action, action, and how this somehow kills the overall ambience and believability quite efficiently for me.

  • cyber_nicco #175 5 years ago

    Great. Gameing for non-gamers...

    When those non-gamers start buying games it will be more interesting. Just becuase the interest of a tipsy aunt can be had for 5 minutes does not a radical system make.

    As a Nintendo fan I am torn, but I am worried about the implications of developing a games system whose biggest selling point is that it appeals to "non-gamers".

    What's next? Art for people that hate art?

  • cyber_nicco #176 5 years ago

    oh, I know...

    Books for people that hate to read....

    come on people, there must be many more....

  • floppylobster #177 5 years ago

    I bought this game and my first impression was I guess I'm going to buy a Xbox 360 as well after all. My Wii COD 3 is currently up for sale if anyone wants it.

    On the plus side I played COD 3 first so I'm enjoying Red Steel (I've heard some complaints). IMO FPS on the Wii should be more on the rails. It's nauseating and completely unnatural trying to look around by pointing. There's a level on Red Steel where you just run down a few corridors shooting guys who are to your left and right (not behind you). That was fun and that's how it should be. Also the way Red Steel handled hand-to-hand and grenades was way better.

    And when the hell are they releasing a plastic connector that joins the Remote to the Nunchuck to form a gun? That will make games like this fun and playable and far more natural. (It's natural to hold a gun - now I've made myself sad).

  • Triggerhappytel #178 5 years ago

    It's official: all Wii launch titles bar Zelda are crap (or, boringly average, at best).

    Given that you can get Zelda on the Cube without leaving a Ł180 hole in your wallet means there is very little reason to buy a Wii right now, IMO>

  • smelly #179 5 years ago

    @Triggerhappytel :

    *sigh*.. yes you're right.. All the games are officially crap because you say so.. Now you can be happy in yourself knowing you've told us all how right you are.. We all agree with you.. they ARE all crap..

    Now feel free to masturbate to death while thinking about all the people you've converted... Because you are SOOO right!

  • oerhoert #180 5 years ago

    Agreed. The Wii may not have had the strongest launch in the history of mankind, but it's surely not as awful as some of you make it out to be. Now if this is the state of affairs in half a year, it would not only be surprising, but also devastating for Nintendo.

    Hence I believe it's not their plan to let it stay like this.

    Also, to reiterate my point from the Tony Hawk thread, Downhill Jam is actually very much worth your money, and has been unfairly treated by many gaming sites. Indeed, its true joy lies in perfecting the techinques and learning the courses well, but that joy is still very tangible and real.

    That the slug-fest Project 8 managed to secure itself a 9 at this site while Downhill Jam only got a 5 is not at all accurate in my view. While Project 8 could clearly have been the better game, it simply wasn't due to the extremely nauseating framerate ... hence I find Downhill Jam's addictive qualities and far superior framerate to be the better alternative, graphics notwithstanding.

    (Of course, I assume the reviewer was in fact experiencing the same awful framerate as me.)

    Maybe some of you should learn to take those EG reviews with a little bit of salt. They are opinions, not The One Truth.

  • smelly #181 5 years ago

    @AdamOfEternia :

    I agree with him! All wii titles suck. End of argument.

  • smelly #182 5 years ago

    >all hes saying is that he doesn't like the games so far on the Wii

    No he didnt, he said all the launch titles are crap.

    > implying that there are not even 5 games on the 360 that would
    >warrent your mighty approval.

    Different thing. I said I normally wait until there are 5 "must have" games on a machine which I personally "must have" before buying ANY console (incl. nintendo's etc), and that is the reason i havent bought a 360 yet. I DIDNT say "all 360 games were crap" did i?

    I just said there wasnt a total of 5 games which i really really really wanted yet - which has always been my sticking point before getting a new games machine (i didnt get a cube until 3 years after it's launch.. and i didnt get a psone until ff7 came out .. way into it's life.. and i never owned a n64 due to it not meeting my criteria as a customer).



    But anyhows, not that it matters, we've all decided all wii games are crap.. So that's the end of the discussion - no point discussing any further..

    Edited by 1 at 19/12/06 @ 00:52

  • smelly #183 5 years ago

    anyone want to buy my ntsc wii?

    I've been converted, i dont want it any more.

  • PameBoy #184 5 years ago

    ...and thus, after an afternoon of relatively interesting and constructive discussion on game design and innovation, we once again descend into extreme reactionary statements and unnecessary console dogma. How can anybody take this stuff so seriously?

  • ice_freezer #185 5 years ago

    Wii version of COD3 doesn't even remotely look like those screens. Bring the real ones, please.

  • Rambaldi #186 5 years ago

    @smelly

    So let me get this straight: you wait, even when there's four must have games available on a console, for a fifth one to appear? This took three years on the Gamecube? You refused to buy an N64 because it didn't meet you customer criteria?

    My dear boy, you have serious, serious, OCD issues.
    Edited by 1 at 19/12/06 @ 09:07

  • kangarootoo #187 5 years ago

    @guvner

    Man, we are totally splitting hairs here. What you are telling me that is you find being chllenged entertaining. I agree with that. I say again, if the challenge with nothing other than boring or frustrating I honestly don't think you would put so much value in it. I don't see challenge and fun as being on the same level. Challenge is there to serve fun (entertainment, I usually call it "fun" when talking about these things).

    You come out of the other side of a challenge feeling you have accomplished something and that gives you a buzz, but if the process of getting there was utterly abhorent would the buzz still seem as sweet? To me it sounds like you actually liked the controls in CoD3, which is totally fine with me, my issue was purely a general one. I fundamentally cannot agree that bad controls somehow a good thing because of the inherent challenge they present.

    bushwod put it perfectly. "Controls shouldn't be challenging, they should be intuitive."

    Anyway, I shall zip it on the subject now :)

  • kangarootoo #188 5 years ago

    @cyber_nicco

    Man, you are pressing my grumpy buttons here. What defines a "gamer" and what defines a "non-gamer". Is someone with only a moderate bookshelf a "non-reader"? Is someone that only rents videos a couple of times a month a "non-film watcher"?

    Balls to all of that I say. Its patronising in the extreme to assume that current "non-gamers" will never take to more traditional games. Anyone who plays games is a gamer and elitism has no place in any of this.

    You will still get your GeOW despite the fact that someone's mum is playing bridge online. These thintgs are not mutually exclusive.

  • oerhoert #189 5 years ago

    Played the game some more yesterday. Can confirm that the controls are actually quite good, with a very different (and in my view at this time - _better_) feel to them than the tradititional Halo-style. Hence I believe it's not only the utterly hardcore that will get to grips with them, but rather 'most people'.

    As as I said before, the game's real problems is neither the controls nor the graphics, but that it doesn't do as interesting things with them as for example Half-Life 2, Hidden & Dangerous series or even Far Cry.

  • Fur_Cough #190 5 years ago

    This review wasn't up to the usual Eurogamer standard.

    In fact, the control system in this game turns a rather average shooter into something engaging and special.

    Shooting straight is only rewarded through delicate and subtle movement, a steady hand, concentration, and practice. In fact, rather like the real thing. Taking out an MG position from cover with a Lee-Enfield won't be achieved without all of these - so when you start to do so regularly (about halfway through the game), each shot becomes rewarding. As it should be.

    Sure, the hand-to-hand dogfights are nasty, as it should be (and, indeed, as they are with a mouse or stick config), and grenade throwing and some of the non-combat control "experiments" shouldn't leave the lab, but this is a control system that is not for the brainless run-and-gunners. The basic shooting mechanic is far deeper than that, and rewards the patient, careful and light-of-touch in spades. As it should be.

    Such a shame this revier couldn't be bothered to have spent the 2-3 hours it takes to begin to make sense. I would recommend he does so - he will find something very special underneath.

  • Hog-lumps #191 5 years ago

    shame this revier couldn't be bothered to have spent the 2-3 hours it takes to begin to make sense

    @Fur_C

    If you read shinjis earlier post, you'll see that he has thoroughly play tested this game to completion. That's surely longer than the 2-3 hours you think he's spent on it......

    Remember, a review is an opinion. Just cause you enjoyed the controls doesn't mean everyone else will either!

    Edit. but I do respect your opinion too - it's entirely feasible that I personally may 'get' the contols like you if I play it! I suppoose these control issues will become less of an issue once we/developers all become more accustomed to the new controller?
    Edited by 2 at 19/12/06 @ 11:20

  • guvner #192 5 years ago

    kangarootoo: "To me it sounds like you actually liked the controls in CoD3"

    Yes, in the 360 version. I didn't like the Wii's control setup at all, much like the EG reviewer by all accounts.

    I missed so many shots and ended up blaming the game for it. Even keeping the remote as steady as I possibly could my aim kept altering constantly, as the review mentions, which is far from ideal considering the number of tiny soldiers that have to be shot on the horizon, in windows, amongst grass, at MG42 gun emplacements, etc.

  • guvner #193 5 years ago

    smelly: "anyone want to buy my ntsc wii?"

    Isn't your criteria for buying a console that 5 must-have titles are available for it? That'll be Zelda and....um....?

  • Hog-lumps #194 5 years ago

    Even keeping the remote as steady as I possibly could my aim kept altering constantly,

    Isn't this to be expected though? Afterall, if you held a gun in real life - your aim would also wander. Keeping a steady aim with a joysitck is as simple as releasing a joystick wheras holding a steady aim with the Wiimote requires effort to maintan hand position (and dare I say it, skill?).

    So to me it's obvious that Wii FPS games will be harder to control, but I could also see that they could be much more gratifying and enjoyable once these sensitivity issues are sorted out.
    Edited by 2 at 19/12/06 @ 12:55

  • kangarootoo #195 5 years ago

    In real life, without any combat training, we would almost certainly get killed in a real life CoD type situation. And we wouldn't even know where the bullet came from. Would that make for a fun game? I think not.

    Realism for its own sake is hugely overated. Again, if realism increases the fun then it has value (and that is in fact usually the case). Even in the case where a flight sim is absolutely realistic and damn hard to boot, for the target audience that is appropriate because the fun comes from the simulation of real life.

    But for what is essentially an arcade shooter, making aiming as tough as with a real firearm in reali life is not appropriate and neither is it an excuse if the player gets frustrated with the controls. There may be people out there want a truly realistic WW2 game, but they aren't the target audience of the CoD franchise.

  • Hog-lumps #196 5 years ago

    Kanga, you've mis-understood my point.

    I'm not saying Wii games should be harder or more realistic. I'm just saying the control method is inherently closer to real life guns because the wii senses 'directional aim' rather than the simple movement of a thumb stick. This could perhaps make a constantly steady aim harder to achieve while the hand wanders a little (as identifed by somone earlier)?

    So although the control method initially presents new/different challenges to the player/developer, with good development in the software (e.g sensitivity adjustments) the control difficulty will obviously improve with time and experience?

    You could argue that arcade Light gun games are even closer to real life - yet are they harder or less fun to play? I don't think so personally.

    On the flip side, Sniper guns in FPS games have artificially increased the control difficulty for years by implementing an artificial ‘wander’ on the aiming reticule. I would argue this makes them more tense and fun depite increasing the toughness of controls.

  • Fur_Cough #197 5 years ago

    Hog-

    fairy nuff. Didn't see the post until you kindly pointed it out.

    The trick of a good review is not just to offer an emotional response, but to tell you why. I can tell you precisely why this game works for me. As there is no stable "hands-off" position, this scheme requires more psychomotor skill than sticks or mouse. (There are several options to experiment with to optimise preferred style (coupled/decoupled) and sensitivity). Each shot has to be aimed, which makes shooting both tricker and more satifying . This, in turn, changes the way in which this FPS is played. Shooting from cover is no longer a matter of lining up the pixels then strafing out until you've got the bead, a game mechanic that has been part of the FPS ever since Wolfenstein 3D. Rather than making iterated adjustments to your crosshairs, each time you poke your head above the parapet you're relying on your own aiming skill. This fundamental difference alone deserves better analytical attention than "I hated this".

    And rather than prove that the Wii misses the mark in appealing to new gamers, this empahsis on skill rather than pixel-management demonstrates the versatility of the Wiimote to appeal to more dedicated gamers in their more frequented genres (FPS), as well as new gamers in mini/party/novelty games (e.g. Wii sports).

    I've always been impressed with EuroGamer, but not this time - have a look at IGN for an altogether more analytical review.

  • guvner #198 5 years ago

    "Realism for its own sake is hugely overated. But for what is essentially an arcade shooter, making aiming as tough as with a real firearm in reali life is not appropriate and neither is it an excuse if the player gets frustrated with the controls. There may be people out there want a truly realistic WW2 game, but they aren't the target audience of the CoD franchise."

    Spot on.

    Seemingly each successive shot ended up different to the last even with a rifle despite my best efforts to keep the remote steady, and when trying to aim specifically at an enemy in a window or wherever, that's not good. At least with a joypad you can simply not touch the right analog stick to maintain aiming direction. Like I said, I ended up blaming the game which is never a good thing of course and had had enough after a few missions.

  • Hog-lumps #199 5 years ago

    Each shot has to be aimed, which makes shooting both tricker and more satifying . This, in turn, changes the way in which this FPS is played. Shooting from cover is no longer a matter of lining up the pixels then strafing out until you've got the bead

    I couldn't agree more, this is what apeals to me about FPS wii games :)

    Although I still maintain the reviewer is entitled to his opininon! ;)

  • kangarootoo #200 5 years ago

    @Hog-lumps

    Ok, I was guilty a little of exagerating your point for my own agenda there. I realise that you weren't necessarily saying that the realism was a justifier for the apparent difficulties the controls are suffering under, rather that it was to some degree inherent in the way the wiimote works (I think).

    On the general point of the apparent random element in the aiming (insofar as a player cannot easily put two bullets in the same place due to their natural body "twitching";), I think they key issue here is whether ir not something feels random.

    If something seems entirely random, a player is going to have problems feeling that further practice will increase their rate of success. Of course, sometimes stuff can feel a bit random until you get the hang of it (Amped and Tony Hawks spring to mind). Form what posters on this thread have been saying, it might be the second case that is occurring in CoD3. At first it feels random and wandering, but after a while your head "recalibrates" and you start to see how you can adjust yourself to get the best out of the controls. Some people have the patience for that, some don't (and frankly shouldn't have to, given that they paid for the thing, but thats the luck of the draw with games I guess).

  • kangarootoo #201 5 years ago

    Some of you may recall, everyso often I have a rant about how too many gamers are whining angry kids, and how anyone looking at gaming must just think "christ, why would I want to get involved with that, they're all stroppy idiots"?

    Well this thread is over 200 posts and for the most part has been a real treat. It burns the cynicism out of my stale old heart to be able to discuss a game related subject without it all turning into mud. Yay for this thread.

    \o/

  • Salaman #202 5 years ago

    I've spent about 3 hours on COD so far.

    My experience compared to some of the issues the reviewer mentioned:

    1) you input your name with the D-pad rather than pointing at the letters on the virtual keyboard on the screen

    AGREE .. it's pants. After naming your Mii's and so on by pointing this seems odd.

    2) The controls are "hyper sensitive" and you need to point at the centre of the screen rock steady.

    BOLLOCKS!
    I've never played an FPS in my life where I could just start a new game and get fragging. I normally start off changing my video settings but this doesn't apply of course. I then fiddle with the mouse sensitivity until I feel I have proper control and a flick of my wrist turns my view as far as I'd expect it to do (180 degrees) not less and not more.
    You need to do the same thing with COD on the Wii.
    The default horizontal setting was too low for me. The default vertical sensititvity too high.
    I whacked up the horizontal sensitivity and reduced the vertical senbsitivity .. et voila.
    From odd, unresponsive and annoying control system it went to super smooth intuitive control system.
    It seems the reviewer failed to do this. Unforgivable IMO.

    3) Grenades via the D-pad sucks

    AGREE .. it is poor judgement to put it there.

    4) The "mini-games" are hit and miss.
    I only encountered one of the two mentioned but I'd hardly call this a mini game. It was more like an immersive set piece. A guy jumps you and you fight him off & clobber him. Due to the instructions being shown on the screen for only a fraction of a second, I had some trouble figuring out exactly what to do and had to figure itout by trial and error to some extend. So a bit annoying. Not as much trouble as the reviewer makes it sound.


    My own gripe:

    Movement is too sluggish. For some reason my guy hardly seems to move forward sometimes. Quite unresponsive and feels like wading knee deep through tar. Must be just me though as nobody else I asked about this was bothered by it.

  • MojoBox #203 5 years ago

    Drink less coffee. Seriously. If you find the aiming mechanism too "hyper-active" you're on something that's making you jerk like a spastic retard. It may be next to impossible to hold completely still, but why would you need to, except to bitch that you can't? It's absolutely not neccesary to play and enjoy the game. The aiming is, in fact, quite good and very accurate. Sorry you're having such difficulties controlling your wrist.

    It's not the most brilliant game, but of all there is to bitch about, aiming is not one.
    Edited by 1 at 19/12/06 @ 16:27

  • kangarootoo #204 5 years ago

    Oh chill out dude. Each to their own.

    If the controls of game A are accessible to everyone immediately, and the controls of game B are only accessible to 50% of new players, game A clearly has the advantage over game B (controls are not gameplay, they are a bridge to the gameplay).

    Just because you had no issues doesn't mean everything is all shiny and light with CoD3. Certainly not to the degree that you can start wheeling out your "jerk like a spastic retard" nonsense.

    If you can't play nice, go play outside by yourself ;)

  • smelly #205 5 years ago

    "So let me get this straight: you wait, even when there's four must have games available on a console, for a fifth one to appear? This took three years on the Gamecube?"


    Yip... bought my gamecube second hand for 30 quid at the time.. Why spend money on a games console if it doesnt have owt worth playing on it?

    Thus the reason i cant see myself getting a ps3 for a while (even if i could).

  • smelly #206 5 years ago

    @guvner:

    "smelly: "anyone want to buy my ntsc wii?"

    Isn't your criteria for buying a console that 5 must-have titles are available for it? That'll be Zelda and....um....?"


    Yip.. as i said.. i've broken my own rule.. Its now obvious to me that the wii sucks because people keep telling me so. So i'm selling it, and buying it again at a cheaper price when it has 5 games i want (apart from zelda which i've now completed)

  • oerhoert #207 5 years ago

    <em>controls are not gameplay</em>

    Well, there's a claim I really need to question, at least.

    I mean, of course controls are gameplay. :)

    Do I have to mention the way Nintendogs got closer to touching an actual pet? The way the Wii Remote let you "feel" objects on the screen through its pointer and rumble, thereby making the screen become more physical? Do I have to point out that grabbing colossi in SOTC would not have been as effective if it was performed with a thumb button as it was with "clinging" your index finger down?

    There exists a chasm between the game world and the player, and the way this chasm is bridged (through different controls) is in so many ways defining the gameplay experience it's not even funny.

    At least, that is my view. :)

  • kangarootoo #208 5 years ago

    @oerhört

    Again, this is sort of semantics. Let me explain myself more clearly, as I think I chose inappropriate words to express my point.

    The purpose of the control system (as I see it) is to take the sentiment you have in your head (assuming that generating an emotional "I am really doing this" response is your aim, which I guess it may not be), and impress that upon the game environment. To take your example of grabbing at the fur of a colossi, what you have in your head is the actual physical feeling of grabbing at something with your own hands. The PS2 sticks are a poor substitute for the tangible feeling your imagination generates, but a shrewd control system will transmit that sentiment into the game as clearly as possible, and all else being well the resultant feeling of "hanging on" will be communicated back to you the player as clearly as possible.

    I suppose what I am saying is that ideally there would be no control system. Nothing feels more like landing a punch (to use Tekken as another example) than actually landing a punch with one of your own hands. But until VR gets to the level of scifi, we have to make do with a bridge. The purpose of a control system as I see it, is to create as transparent a bridge as possible between the sentiment in your head and the game environment. In the case of CoD3, the sentiment is "shooting the enemy with a rifle", so the control system needs to transmit the action of shooting a rifle into the game, and in return transmit the feeling of shooting the rifle back to the player.

    A well designed control system will assist in the process, but the essence of what it does is to connect the player with the game world as seamlessly as possible, and it is that connection that allows entertaining gameplay to take place. I think my original point was lost a little in my pursuit of a snappy one sentence summary. But I hope what I was rambling on about is a little clearer now.

  • markr #209 5 years ago

    I found it the best FPS I've ever played on a console, purely because the control scheme is so much better than any dual analogue shooter I've ever played. But that's me showing my mouse and keyboard bias. I can't say I've had the difficulty that the reviewer had.

    Change the sensitivity until you like it and go. I'd like to see future games allow you to fiddle the controls a bit more though, such as changing the size of the "dead" area before you start turning, and being able to independantly adjust your turn rate and your actual aiming sensitivity.

  • Fur_Cough #210 5 years ago

    Really glad to see so much decent discussion.

    The fact that this has divided people so much into love it / hate it (regardless that CoD3 is not very pretty, doesn't sound great, has some dodgy 'mini-games', strange design decisions, and annyoingly unskippable cut scenes) IMHO demonstrates that the Wii isn't just a gimmick - it is something more fundamentally different.

    Now let's hope enough developers get on board to make decent games for all of us.

  • tentonipete #211 5 years ago

    what is the point of saying go and get the game on other consoles? i don't have other consoles.

  • PameBoy #212 5 years ago

    the main gripe i have with the review is that it seems to be giving people the impression that the game is bad - which, trust me, it isn't. you can see that from looking at any number of trusted review sites. unfortunately most people seem to want to believe anything they're told without questioning it, in all walks of life, and this is no exception. it also gives creedence to the fallacy that the Wii has a crap launch lineup, when in fact there are easily 3 or 4 games worth buying, imho.
    just because a few reviewers didn't "get it" in the limited time available to them doesn't mean you can go reusing their experiences as irreversible revealed truths.
    erm, to be honest, i'm not really talking about games any more. this kind of thing just generally gets my goat. and i'm floating off topic.

  • dolphan #213 5 years ago

    Bit late, but I got the game for Christmas, and this has now really shaken my faith in EG. The control system did indeed seem as godawful as the review described - for the first 5 minutes. Right up until I went into the options menu and turned the sensitivity down from it's ridiculously high initial setting. Since then it's been great. Far better than analog stick control, if not quite up to mouse and keyboard standard.

  • Ryze #214 5 years ago

    Have they not supported the classic controller?

    This game has obviously been rushed to realease in time for Christmas.