Worms: A Space Oddity Review

By Ellie Gibson Published 28 March, 2008

Like the good old days, but bad.

Version tested: Wii

In 1998, my best friend and I spent hours playing Worms 2. We played it in a basement flat in Catford, him sitting on a broken office chair, me on a rickety piano stool, taking it in turns to shove each the other out the way and grab the mouse. We watched the action unfold on a 14-inch CRT monitor, while a CD drive made of whalebone and powered by steam whirred away under the desk. For hours.

Imagine if someone from the future had come to us and said, "In ten years' time, you will still be playing Worms. But you will be playing it on a 46-inch high definition flatscreen television, using motion-sensing controllers which will be wirelessly connected to a hugely popular Nintendo console the size of three DVDs." What would we have said?

"What's a DVD?" first off. Then, "You mean there will be a console more popular than the Dreamcast?" and "Will there be hoverboards?" and "Are they doing another series of This Life?" At which point the man from the future would lose his temper and say, "Look, I'm really here about the Worms thing," and we'd go, "Oh. Brilliant!"

But what if the man replied, "Well, not really. See, you will still be playing Worms in ten years. Almost exactly the same game, in fact. Only rubbish. And it'll look crap on your massive telly. And the motion-sensing controllers will be much fiddlier to use than a mouse. And 90 per cent of the other software for the Nintendo console will be collections of appalling mini-games, and you'll be forced to play them until your elbows crack and your wrists snap, like the modern-day equivalent of a lockjaw girl in a match factory, just so you can afford to rent half a paving slab in a part of London that has more murderers than tube stations. Also don't rely on the State pension."

Lost in space

'Worms: A Space Oddity' Screenshot 1

The range of hats you get to choose from is particularly poor.

He'd have been telling the truth, unfortunately. I'm going to spend my old age living under a bridge and eating out of bins using a fork I have to hold with my toes, and Worms: A Space Oddity is rubbish.

For those who aren't familiar, it's the first Worms game for the Wii and the 56,978th in the series. Worms is a strategy game involving turn-based battles across 2D landscapes. (There were some flirtations with 3D and "forts" a few years ago but all that's best forgotten.) What made the original games great was the huge satisfaction to be had in annihilating your enemies, and the huge range of weapons you had to do them over with.

Not to mention gadgets such as bungee ropes, girders and blowtorches that helped you navigate battlegrounds and take cover. There was real scope for working out increasingly creative and ever-more gratifying strategies. As a result, the winner was left brimming with joyful satisfaction, while the loser was filled with rage. Boiling, spitting, furious rage. The kind of rage that makes a grown man push a woman off a piano stool, say.

There are 17 weapon and gadget options in Worms: A Space Oddity. That includes the surrender flag and the miss-a-go skipping rope. You also get a rocket pack and teleporter, a laser sight for practicing shots, a digger and girders. So that leaves ten weapons, many of which have been given odd new names. The bazooka is an 'impact frag', the grenade a 'time frag', the uzi a 'blaster'. Instead of air and napalm strikes, you get 'UFO' and 'drop ship' strikes. Then there's the 'astro punch' (dragon punch), 'atom pack' (dynamite), 'cluster frag' (cluster grenade) and 'guided frag' (homing missile). The only remotely silly weapon is the 'robo sheep', which scampers across the landscape until you detonate it.

Control issues

Perhaps they were forced to give the weapons fluffier names to please Nintendo and/or secure the game's 7+ PEGI rating. But it's unlikely that's also the reason there's such a limited range of weapons. Why no Holy Hand Grenade or Ming vase? Not even a super sheep or banana bomb? Not to mention the fact there's no bungee rope, which makes getting around levels much more difficult.

To make matters worse, the control system makes the weapons a chore to use. The pointer sticks to the edge of the screen if you're more than a metre and a half away from the telly. It jerks around on menu screens. Scrolling around landscapes, done by holding + and moving the remote around, is a slow and awkward process.

You move worms and aim using the d-pad. Selecting weapon power is done by moving the remote up or down and pressing B to lock. Then you flick the remote forward and release B to fire. It works okay, but it all feels fiddly, unnecessary and ultimately tedious.

A Wii game just wouldn't be a Wii game without a bunch of poor-to-middling mini-games, and there are six included here. They involve doing things like twisting the remote to pilot a spaceship through a cavern, or using it to control worms wearing rocket packs. They're all available in multiplayer but first you must unlock them in story mode, which involves playing through dozens of extremely boring single-player levels. None of the mini-games are worth the effort.

'Worms: A Space Oddity' Screenshot 2

Up to four players can compete against each other. If they want to.

There's no online multiplayer mode, which has caused complaints (you can read some of them, plus a response from Team 17, in one of our comments threads). I couldn't care less. For me, most of the fun of Worms has always been being in the same room as your opponent, trading insults, laughing at them, pushing them off piano stools et cetera. I can see why this might be a dealbreaker for some people, but there are plenty of other factors worth smashing the deal to bits for.

Take the price. Like Worms on Xbox Live Arcade, Worms: A Space Oddity is a 2D strategy game with visuals and gameplay that haven't changed in ten years. The former has the added bonus of online play, if you like that sort of thing, and costs GBP 6.80. The latter has no online play, a poorer control system and worse graphics. It carries an RRP of 39.99.

It's one thing to churn out the same game ten years after it was made. It's another to churn out an inferior version and charge people full whack for it. Even when you take into account the online discounts possible at Amazon or Play, Worms: A Space Oddity is less enjoyable than the Worms game I was playing ten years ago, and the Worms game you can buy on XBLA for a fraction of the price. "Mr Future Man," I'd say, "You can keep your new fangled motion-sensing controllers and your console the size of a DVDA, or whatever it was. Sounds like we're better off sticking with Worms 2. I'll have the telly though."

4 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (85) Latest comment 4 years ago

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

  • HarryPalmer #1 4 years ago

    Viking review? if you could have it up by lunch time (1pm) so i know whether or not to buy it that would be great, cheers.

    /slithers back inside host

  • Xerx3s #2 4 years ago

    I feel really sorry for t17. Being forced to do nothing else but remake the same games over and over again.

  • Dougs #3 4 years ago

    Oh dear

  • dsmx #4 4 years ago

    Sorry spadge your efforts don't look to be good enough. The question I keep asking is why haven't you re-released worms 2 or worms Armageddon on one of the consoles.

  • mingster #5 4 years ago

    I'd love to go back in time with todays gadgets and freak out people showing them the latest technology.
    don't reckon it would be long before you'd get abducted by secret govenment forces and interogated about the future though.

  • Crea #6 4 years ago

    Viking review in time for a lunchtime purchase or rejection please! :)

  • evilbert #7 4 years ago

    @ Xerx3s - don't feel sorry for them! You would think that by remaking the same game over and over that they might eventually get it right and make a good one! Like Ellie, I had great fun with the original Worms back in the day and nothing bar Hogs of War on the PS came close to it since.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 11:33

  • gizmo #8 4 years ago

    Ouch, move on T17. I wonder if they're stuck in a sort of Groundhog day?

  • vegard #9 4 years ago

    too bad...still, team 17 made so many great amiga games that i still love them. GOD I AM OLD!

  • Daymare #10 4 years ago

    That's just it, the price. Let's, for instance, compare Space Oddity with SSBB. The latter is on dual-layer, choke-full of content and unlockable stuff and stages and characters and videos and 8h single player mode and just about everything, while the former has about 2 min worth of forgettable video, less weapons then versions before, laughable costumization options, negligible unlockables, no online, teams with only three worms, only a few backgrounds/planets, small stages, camera issues, etc. etc. And yet, they're priced the same. Ten years later and they have to leave stuff out just so they can release yet another and another version, gradually putting stuff back in that was suppose to be there in the first place. Shame. Very disappointed, as it could have been a perfect multiplayer game for Wii.

  • wonk #11 4 years ago

    Bummer, I haven't played a Worms game since the Amiga (I personally think the Director's Cut version was near perfect) and I was just about ready to give the franchise another go, shame this sucks so bad.

    Like Ellie, I am not that gutted about the lack of online multiplayer but everything else makes this sound like a real cash-in. Worms, like SSBB, is supposed to be chocked full of content, the mechanic is simple so all the thinks like concrete donkeys and bungies provide the variety and replayability, this just sounds terrible and I for one and very disappointed.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 11:46

  • old_skool #12 4 years ago

    shhhhh !!!!

    Don't tell smelly the score...he might get upset...

  • Charroux #13 4 years ago

    This is an *enormous* missed opportunity. There's nothing wrong with the Worms formula IMO. The execution in this case seems just dire. No online play? Fewer weapons? Crappy minigames? And £40 bleedin quid? Count me out...

    Edit: not to mention that the Wii controller *should* be perfect for this game.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 11:46

  • japstersam #14 4 years ago

    worms used to be amazing, i always liked all the premade names you could have when you customised your team...'The Face' always made an appearance in mine....
    this looks crap though, shame!
    +yeah i was wondering about the viking review as well xD

  • spadge #15 4 years ago

    As I've said previously, this title is aimed at a much more casual market, not necessarily hard-core gamers and we worked with THQ's marketing in terms of hitting what was thought to be the game it needed since publishers do all the research on this stuff.

    The games market has grown and developed in the last decade and the Wii (and to some extent the DS) have brought a wider range of players and many of these are new gamers, not ones who are perhaps jaded by games in general. Obviously it's very disappointing that Ellie didn't like the game but we think large sections of the Wii audience will, developing Wii games in competition with the 1st party Nintendo titles breathing down your neck with almost unlimited time/budget & with major franchises is pretty difficult all told - we just don't have the same luxuries when we're developing titles with 3rd party publishers.

    In terms of pricing, that has very little, if anything to do with Team17 at all. For the XBLA edition we self-published that and were in control of all content, pricing, PR, everything - that in turn had very little to do with THQ, who are publishing this & the Open Warfare series. Other Team17 self-published titles are planned (we used to do that stuff in the early 90's too...). At the moment I can't comment on what these may be or when they will occur and on what platform. We are working on non-Worms titles too, just before anyone asks about that... questions about Alien Breed notwithstanding.

    With the XBLA edition of Worms, we also aimed a more 'casual' approach to the game, especially given that whilst its been popular in Europe for a while, there was an opportunity to really introduce it to the US Market. The game was 'most played' on XBLA last year - and only just outsold by TMNT (which coincided with a film release) - this justifies the position we took at the time in my book. We can appreciate the comments by fans of the older series and we're currently cooking something up - more news on that later this year.

    As for "getting it right" it might be worth a look at the DS/PSP editions of the game (Open Warfare 2) released last Autumn, both of which have scored very high metacritic review scores and are now available at reduced prices.

  • old_skool #16 4 years ago

    I played Worms 2007 on my LG KU990, isn't half bad really. You get the feeling it's one of those IP's that should just be put to a quick death.

  • old_skool #17 4 years ago

    @spadge

    That's all good and well but if a game's controls are lacking then what do you expect ?

  • FooAtari #18 4 years ago

    I don't understand whats so hard about this T17

    Just remake the first game with some fancier graphics and be done with it. Played that to death back in the day.

  • presh #19 4 years ago

    ouch

  • Daymare #20 4 years ago

    @spadge

    Well, I tried a few rounds with my "casual gamer-ish" (girl)friend, and she didn't get on with controls very well:/ There should defenitely be a few (or as many as possible, really) different control options.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 12:03

  • dsmx #21 4 years ago

    Or you could remake Worms Armageddon and give people the option of turning the more outlandish weapons off and you'll keep everyone happy.

  • TheNinkyNonk #22 4 years ago

    @spadge

    You say this is aimed at a more casual audience, but how are they/we supposed to know this? Calling it 'Worms:...' implies it's been around for some time (which it has) and thus might put off new 'casual' buyers. It also sends signals to those of us thatalready like Worms that it will be, y'know, Worms-proper and not Worms-lite.

    Might I suggest that if you're approached to produce a game aimed at a different demographic, you actually use some original IP so as to differentiate the product instead of tarnishing your very, very old one?

  • wonk #23 4 years ago

    @spadge: Thanks for taking the time to contribute to the discussion here, developers are rarely as accessible and honest and I personally appreciate that.

    On the broader point, I find it interesting that T17 seem very focussed on re-invention with the Worms franchise rather than refinement. Coincidentally, last night I was reading an interview with Andy Davidson (orginial creator of Worms) in Retro Gamer and he mentioned that he left T17 after Worms: The Directors Cut due in part of differences about the direction the franchise was taking. It occured to me that Andy wanted the series to evolve as a SSB has, as a fan service type thing, refining and expanding weapons and content rather than reinvention.

    I can understand T17 amd THQ's wish to appeal to the broadest market possible, and on the Wii that does mean targetting people not necessarily familiar with the franchise but I personally think it is possible to do both, having an accessible and appealing game to a new audience that still build on the depth and variety of the first few versions that Ellie identifies as missing.


  • coojam #24 4 years ago

    I always loved the graphics in the first game and not really the more cartoon ones since. Maybe you could make an adult version of worms with "photo" realism? I'm half heartedly joking here, but maybe it could work?

  • spadge #25 4 years ago

    I don't believe the publisher (or Nintendo upon submission/testing) suggested there was anything wrong or untoward about the control mechanisms developed for this - quite the reverse given our publishers responses. The wii controller isn't instant like a mouse might be and that explains it's occasional sluggishness when using it in remote mode.

    Given that we've developed the title for a number of platforms (and the controls are generally all fine) I'm not sure why it appears we've gone out of our way to deliberately make things difficult or less than intuitive. The aim (again working closely with the publisher) was to make a lot of use of the Wii gesture controls and not over-complicate the game for a wider market, we knew that here would be some resentment from veterans of the series, but such is life. The development of the game on Wii is really quite a new direction opposed to the Open Warfare series released last summer.

  • wonk #26 4 years ago

    @spadge

    Can I ask, do developers do gold-version play testing with target demographics like the test screenings common in film-making? That is, testing the game on people unconnected with its development/QA?

  • Nikanoru #27 4 years ago

    The wii controller isn't instant like a mouse might be

    Then why, pray tell, do many games and apps manage actual instant response anyway? Magic?

  • Saladin #28 4 years ago

    DVDA...I feel so dirty for understanding that joke :(

  • Eighthours #29 4 years ago

    As I've said previously, this title is aimed at a much more casual market, not necessarily hard-core gamers

    I'm sorry, Spadge, but this has always struck me as a very poor excuse, much along the lines of George Lucas's "Star Wars Episode I is just a kid's film, so who cares" dismissal of criticism.

    Take Pixar, for example. Yes, their films are aimed at kids and the mainstream. Yet they're still astonishingly well put together (in general) without cutting any corners or treating their audience like idiots, and as a result the hardcore film fans love them too. "We're aiming for the casual market" in the games industry equals an excuse to deliver less content at a lower quality, and it has to stop.

    Incidentally, I liked Worms XBLA a lot.

  • dsmx #30 4 years ago

    If I was doing the controls I would of used the b button to bring up the inventory, the pointer to select weaponry and aim airstrikes, d pad to move and aim, the a button to fire, some wii mote gestures for jumping and the 1 and 2 buttons to zoom in and out.

  • spadge #31 4 years ago

    Wonk. Fair points although there's some reasoning behind it all (which I won't go into). I don't think your sentiments are too far away from how we feel here but generally speaking, publishers have their own agenda and directions to go in - which we work with in a partnership. I think that has worked very well in the Open Warfare series and it remains to be seen if the right choices have been made for the Wii market (Take2's Carnival Games sells very well despite the hard-core dismissing it, for e.g.)

    With regards to Andy it was a case that he wanted to work in a certain way and we didn't - we didn't get on with his new concept and as a result he didn't work on anything much after Worms2 and went his own way, which was a shame but that's life. I think we've moved on and Andy did very well from the whole Worms thing. In the time that Worms came to the fore and when Armageddon was released, the industry had moved on (largely due to the PSX's arrival) and we had to react to that.

    In terms of evolution rather than revolution, I think that Worms Armageddon/World Party were testament to that just as the Open Warfare series is and the XBLA edition went back to the roots of the game.

  • Camorrista #32 4 years ago

    I don't even care about the game. You only need to read until the first sub-header to see that this review is utter genius.

    Genuinely funny, thanks Ellie!

  • Cyhwuhx #33 4 years ago

    .::: I'm still amazed at the fact that both THQ and T17 don't realise that the casual appeal in Worms lies with the weaponry. Having all those insane items is what makes the game fun and accessible. The less weapons and the more normal they are, the more hardcore the experience becomes. For some reason they think completely the other way around. People don't want to take in the wind while aiming a bazooka. They want to throw a Concrete Donkey and be done with it. While laughing at whoever is going down.

    Each new version seems hell-bent on making a tournament-draft instalment, which is not fun. To anyone.

  • Camorrista #34 4 years ago

    Christ, not even a banana bomb?! The FIRST game had it, for crying out loud!

    Lazy doesn't even begin to describe it.

  • spadge #35 4 years ago

    Eighthours, fair point but I don't think we quite have the luxury of Pixar productions (in terms of time/resources) to make the game we probably would make if left at it for a fair bit longer. Most games these days are built to aggressive production schedules, not this vague "cooking" process until they pop out finished and lovely. There are exceptions of course, but even then that's no guarantee of commercial success. In most cases, time and money largely dictate the quality of game development/production - it's the same with films.

  • spadge #36 4 years ago

    Camorrista, the direction for the game is somewhat different to the original - we were asked to give the game a space 'b-movie' feel and that's where it all went, the mechanics of the original game are still in there, but adapted for the Wii gestures. It's not a port of the original or recent XBLA title, etc.

  • spadge #37 4 years ago

    Retrend. The fact that Worms XBLA was 'most played XBLA title of 2007' (and 2nd best seller, still in the XBLA top-ten) and the DS and PSP editions of Open Warfare2 released last year both score around 80% on metacritic/game-rankings actually prove otherwise - so if you want to have a pop, at least get your facts straight eh.

    Our publisher requested a very specific direction and that's where we've ended up, rather than a Wii edition of Open Warfare 2.

  • Daymare #38 4 years ago

    /eagerly awaits for Wii edition of Open Warfare 2 with added stuff, tons of unlockables, more control options etc:)

  • SomeRandomGuy #39 4 years ago

    counter review... Might change a few yers minds

    http://ww w.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=316...

  • dsmx #40 4 years ago

    Spadge regardless of what you told to aim for there is no excuse for getting the controls wrong and making the arsenal smaller than the arsenal in the very first worms. I'm well aware of the time constraints that developers are under but all I can see from this game is another half arsed wii game that didn't have enough time and money put into it. The exclusion of online play, the lack of weaponry, the imprecise controls in a game that needs precision will ruin anyone's experience of it.

  • Mr.Small #41 4 years ago

    DVDA

    XD

  • Zelos #42 4 years ago

    This is standard procedure for Worms games, isn't it? They release a quickly-made, crap version with lots of weapons and features cut out. Then 6-12 months they release a full version with the bugs fixed, more weapons and online play. They did it for the PSP and DS.

  • Eighthours #43 4 years ago

    Eighthours, fair point but I don't think we quite have the luxury of Pixar productions (in terms of time/resources) to make the game we probably would make if left at it for a fair bit longer. Most games these days are built to aggressive production schedules, not this vague "cooking" process until they pop out finished and lovely. There are exceptions of course, but even then that's no guarantee of commercial success. In most cases, time and money largely dictate the quality of game development/production - it's the same with films.

    Fair points all. I guess what I'm trying to say is that aiming at a casual market shouldn't make a game dev/musician/film director not care about the attention to detail that they would have put in if they were after hardcore sales under the same time pressures (actually, I hate the terms "hardcore" and "casual", but there doesn't seem to be anything better).

    Too often, in my opinion, aiming at the casual market seems to encourage a certain attitude of, "Well, they won't notice if we don't do this, and don't do this, and don't do this, and short cut on this, so let's just bodge it" and that's unfortunate. I'm not saying that's you (I haven't played the Wii version of Worms yet), it's just a general state of disappointment about the current state of third party Wii development.

    There's nothing wrong with doing things "on the cheap" at all - there are many games, past and present, that haven't had gazillions of pounds spent on development and yet are brilliantly fun. Yet there are many more where you get the impression that the devs thought they could shortcut or ignore aspects of game design that should be essential, because they figure that their target market's "uneducated" enough (another horrible word) to still buy the software despite its major failings.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 13:07

  • andromeda #44 4 years ago

    wiilol

  • spadge #45 4 years ago

    Zelos. Open Warfare 2 actually came 18months after Open Warfare... not "6/12 months". If we'd have gone for the feature set of WOW2 on the DS/PSP when we started the game in Autumn 2005, we'd have been laughed at since there was no online play libraries for either - also, as the market expands and there are more and more consoles, you can budget more on development = more content/features, that's just how it works - not just for us, but for pretty much all developers except those working for 1st party hardware manufacturers. Many games series update annually, Worms doesn't although it does appear on a wider range of platforms annually.

  • spadge #46 4 years ago

    Eighthours, I really can't accept that there was any "uncaring" attitude by anyone involved with the game. The content and direction might not be to everyone's tastes but thats certainly not to suggest it was uncaring work at all. I think the Wii has taken a lot of developers/publishers by surprise (with one obvious exception, the platform holder itself) and it's such a new and wildly different marketplace to the other consoles, it's difficult to hit the nail on the head from the off. I tend to agree that there's a perception that the market is younger and more casual and publishers are trying hard to meet that market. How it pans out in terms of market & demand we'll have to see.

  • spadge #47 4 years ago

    Retrend, they are based on the same formula, they aren't the same game - WOW2 features quite a range of features above and beyond W2/WA. It's what people were asking for, they got it, in whats one of the most feature-packed handheld titles of all time.

    You could argue that a lot of titles are essentially the same game as a decade ago. Improvements and refinements have affected all games. People seem to neglect to consider that in a decade, gaming has gone mass-market and that means a constant flow of new players, I just don't get how people who have been playing games for years somehow perceive that the industry revolves around them.

    At the end of the day, you pay your money and you take your choice. There's a lot of games & systems out there, there's a ton of choice and just like me who hates "Ashes To Ashes" after loving "Life On Mars" we are all entitled to that.

    That said, I haven't felt compelled to have been on BBC forums berating the hell out of the stupid directional decisions (imho) they've made with that... :-P
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 13:33

  • Waffleaber #48 4 years ago

    "no Holy Hand Grenade"

    no sale.

    Seriously though how can the second iteration of a game series as ancient as this still be the one with the most features/weapons?!?

  • spadge #49 4 years ago

    Retrend there's a whole raft of stuff in WOW2, I won't bother listing it, but try the magnets, sentry guns and all the interactive events for a quick start. All have these have a significant effect on how it all plays.

    With regards to Worms, we have 3 titles in development, 2 in pre-production, 1 in concept and 3-4 digital/online distribution titles in the pipeline. Of these 9-10 titles, 4 are Worms titles. I hope that answers your question.

  • OrgasmicMutton #50 4 years ago

    Let's face it Team 17 have had a difficult task making new Worms game largely because they perfected the game with Worms World Party.

    The series constantly improved up to Worms Armageddon and then Worms World Party was basically the same game with the online interface (like Elle this of secondary importance to me, although I did love the odd game of Roper or Shoppa back in the day) nicely tidied up.

    Everything after this point is either below par or just a retread. The foray into 3D wasn't disastrous but the games lacked the sparkle of the old 2D versions. However I guess it must have been tough to face accusations of retreading the game. However I think that it was worth trying it out, in retrospect it wasn't fantastic but who was to know that at the time? You never know until you try. Maybe one day another of these tries will manage to get it exactly right - which would be a pleasant and very welcome surprise.

    The XBLA version (I don't have an XBox so can't comment much on this) seemed to me to be timely and a great idea as it introduced the good old perfected version of Worms to a new audience and got people playing again.

    This Wii game though seems like a missed opportunity to do the same again but with some nice new controls. I was previously looking forward to it, after all crowding a bunch of people round a PC isn't the best way to enjoy multiplayer so a console version with some potentially fun motion sensing shennanigans was of great appeal to me. However after reading the reviews I don't think I'm going to bother. I just don't understand why Team 17 would take a step backwards from a perfected formula. Yes they'd have been accused of repetition again but they'd just be giving a new audience (for the Wii has sucked in lots of non gamers) the chance to play a simple to learn tough to master, funny and above all enjoyable game. However removing most of the weapons that made the game so fun, reducing the team sizes and what look like some horribly dumbed down basic weapons and controls seems inexplicable to me. Plus not being able to hear that wonderful cry of "BUNGEE" makes me a sad lad.

    I also don't see why non gamers would have problems with the established Worms style. I managed to play it when I was just a young lad (having made the decision to buy the game over Colin McRae rally with the toss of a coin, definitely a fortuitous coin toss there!). One of the joys of Worms is that anyone over the age of 7 can make a decent fist of playing it!

    C'mon just remake Armageddon for the Wii! People would have hours of fun with that.

    ----

    Oh and I have to add when I was going on about retreads I may have sounded a bit negative but I didn't mean to. By all means get the best quality Worms game onto as many platforms as possible. I think that's fantastic.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 13:53

  • spadge #51 4 years ago

    You're right, I'm not specifically a fan of the Wii. But then, I'm not really a fan of any particular console - that's me personally, not T17. I do own a Wii, along with all other consoles - I just play the games I like and disregard the console as such. That might be on Wii, PS3 or 360, DS or PSP... just depends on the game.

    The mouse comment was basically that the controller isn't as fluid and responsive as a mouse, which it isn't. Yes Metroid does use it very well in the context of it's play, but that doesn't change my viewpoint. I'm not knocking the Wii here, it's just a fact that the controller isn't massively precise or fast (in comparison with a mouse). For the record you can 'paint' your own levels in the Wii Worms game, mouse-like and can guide around guided missiles in a similar fashion.

  • dsmx #52 4 years ago

    Spadge if the wiimote isn't as responsive as a mouse then don't use it for things that require instant and precise responses. Use it for selecting items on a menu, some general gestures to do things like jumping or looking round the map. Use the buttons and d-pad for precise things like aiming, movement and shot power.

  • Wyrm #53 4 years ago

    The only good Worms game was the first one. The rest are too stupid and overcomplicated with all their uberdestruction weapons that required no skill or planning to hit anyone with.

  • spadge #54 4 years ago

    We did :-) The controls try not to be a gimmick (as we feel they are in many Wii games) and therefore the shot power for grenades and bazooka's is "thrown" and you also get to see the trail/path (which can be turned off). Aiming and walking is on the D-pad. The remote works fine for guiding missiles (the missiles travel at a speed which makes it work) and positioning teleports etc. We've tried to make sense of it rather than just lazily throwing gestures here and there. A number of iterations of the controls were made and changes right along the way since it was a game built around a very precise & direct control system.

  • Camorrista #55 4 years ago

    @spadge

    It's great to see you contribute as a developer. I only realized right now that someone from T17 is participating here, and really: Very, very classy of you, big kudos.

    I have to say however, that the "The wii controller isn't instant like a mouse might be and that explains it's occasional sluggishness when using it in remote mode" comment just doesn't hold as long as there's Trauma Center on the Wii. Say what you will, but the pointer control in that game was flawless, exact and without delay. I'm sure there are more examples.

    I won't be buying the title for some reasons, the most prominent of which is the severely reduced content. There was simply no reason to eliminate practically all the weapons, no matter the console or demographic you were developing for.

    Edit: I would like to add that no matter what I think about this specific title, my esteem and respect for T17 has gone up significantly because of your comments here. Your participation has definitely left me with a favorable impression of your company.
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 14:42

  • AbyssUK #56 4 years ago

    But the big question.. why the weapon name changes ???? Was it PEGI nonsense ??

  • smelly #57 4 years ago

    Im sorry spadge. I'm apparently the biggest wii fanboy on here (if you ask anyone no doubt).

    But I regardless of control method. I lost ALL interest in this when you announced all the promised online features were going to get removed (if they were ever in there in the first place).

    But back to the control method.. you say that you appreciate metroids aiming works like a mouse, but then you say that something as simple as worms cant. WTF? As long as you keep the gameplay running at 60hz, there's no reason at all why the wii pointer cant be as smooth as a mouse.

    And if your game team are struggling to get WORMS of all things running at 60hz.. i suggest you seriously consider getting them new jobs doing something they're more suited to (like making tea)

  • Nikanoru #58 4 years ago

    I could reword my question that spadge apparently missed, but instead I'll just copypaste:


    The wii controller isn't instant like a mouse might be

    Then why, pray tell, do many games and apps manage actual instant response anyway? Magic?

  • dsmx #59 4 years ago

    So spadge let me get this straight you made a game aimed at the casual market but instead of keeping the control system that was brilliantly simple yet amazingly effective you chose to make it more complicated for the casual market? Do you not see a slight problem with that?

  • smelly #60 4 years ago

    On to your other points:

    >As I've said previously, this title is aimed at a much more casual market,

    You know as well as i do that's a bullshit marketing term. Who is this "imaginary" casual market? This so called marketing mans wet dream of a whole family playing games together, who have never played games before, and so will appreciate being sold shit? If it's as big as the marketing men say it is - i should know at least 1 family like that should i? I dont btw.

    ">ave brought a wider range of players and many of these are new gamers, not ones who are perhaps jaded by games in general."

    I fall into the 2nd category.. I dont see why making them even more jaded by bringing out a half assed unfinished game is going to help. FFS worms isnt exactly the most complex thing to make is it?


    >"developing Wii games in competition with the 1st party Nintendo"

    Now I *KNOW* you're a marketing man. That's just bull shit. Regardless of the quality of first party nintendo games. You should still be able to come up with your own high quality titles. It's not as if they're doing anything like the game you've just made is it?

    That's like saying "well I cant believe my racing game got a shit review and a score of 1/10.. But what do you expect when we're developing in competition with 10/10 games from squaresoft..



    >(Take2's Carnival Games sells very well despite the hard-core dismissing it, for e.g.)

    I can imagine the meeting around the marketing table:

    "hey guys.. a shit game is selling really well on the wii. Therefor if we dont bother to make any effort at all.. And make a shit unfinished game with no features.. Then we will probably sell millions without any real effort as well"

    "by jove I think he's got something.. Why are we paying for 10 programmers to make the online element.. Take them all off the project and keep 2 juniors straight out of college who cant even get a 2d game running at 60hz on the project!"

    "WE'LL BE RICH!!!"

  • Hog-lumps #61 4 years ago

    dsmx, how do you know the controls are more complicated? Have you played the game?

  • smelly #62 4 years ago

    @Nikanoru: I can answer that for him.. it's because they couldn't get a 2D (?!?) game running at 60hz

  • dsmx #63 4 years ago

    How can it not be more complicated? All the other games had 1 button to fire every weapon and maybe another to change the fuse timer/direction.

  • Daymare #64 4 years ago

    It *does* have to be said that there's nothing *really* wrong with WiiWorms controls. I like them, in fact. It's completely managable to throw a grenade or a rocket - pointing somewhere to teleport, guiding missiles around, digging motions for shovel, all cool. But if my casual-gaming friends are having too much trouble using a rocket - the primary weapon in the arsenal - nobody's having much fun. I hope they'll get better before they loose interest, 'cause I really want to play some Worms on Wii:/

    And there's the camera, which is also quite a big issue for "casuals", at least in my (short) experience - you have to hold a "+" button to move it around, but there's a slight delay before the camera icon appears and it's too sensitive, which is especially noticable on smaller televisions.

    In my opinion, the user-friendliness that would draw in the "casuals" wasn't *really* achieved (partialy, yes), which is a big problem, since "serious" gamers and Worms fans are clearly not the target audience here.

    I'm not being negative just for the sake of it. I'm (still) a big Worms fan. If THQ would sell Space Oddity for 20 (or even less), it would be a 7/10 material. But, priced as it is ...

  • Hog-lumps #65 4 years ago

    dsmx, I just find it infuriating when gamers critise control schemes before trying it themselves!

    You might find it works in practice or you might hate it - but how do know till you try it?!

  • Dezm0nd #66 4 years ago

    after all this debating and bickering you've released a shit game. :p

    Loved Worms XBLA, but can't you do something new now?
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 15:38

  • Hog-lumps #67 4 years ago

    Looking at some of the comments that people have made in this thread to spadge (like above), it's little wonder that more developers don't give us their comments/views more often................. :(
    Edited by 1 at 28/03/08 @ 15:48

  • smelly #68 4 years ago

    He sounds more like a marketing man than a developer..

    Developers wouldnt be allowed to post.

  • smelly #69 4 years ago

    I guess what annoys me most about this - is that i would be a worms customer.. if it had online.

    Now on games like smash bros, mario kart, etc i can take or leave the online. Preferring more to play single player or the odd offline multiplayer match at my place after some beers on a friday night.

    But worms pretty much NEEDS online.

    So my only hope is for a sequel. But i can see that not happening.

    See when this version doesnt sell. It wont be because of all it's problems (i.e. lack of online, high price), it'll be because of the old classic claimed by marketing men of shit games : "3rd party games dont sell on a nintendo platform". So they'll either not bother putting the money into making a decent sequel.. or do one.. and make it equally shit as "it wont sell anyway".

    The other side of the coin is if this version DOES sell.. Then it'll be because it proves "wii gamers dont want online and they want shit cut down games instead". So a sequel will be equally as fucked.

  • ShiftyGeezer #70 4 years ago

    It's 'phossy jaw' the match girls suffered from, caused by phosphorous. Lockjaw is mostly associated with a bacterial tetanus infection.

  • dryden555 #71 4 years ago

    Developers dumb down their games hoping that the mythical "casual gamer" will buy their game in droves and they will make loads of money. This business strategy may work with Pokemon stuff for really little kids but its gonna fail otherwise.

  • Kaparen #72 4 years ago

    ..duh..duh..duh..duh..duh..another one bites the dust...

  • Landmaster #73 4 years ago

    Ellie's a Nintendo-Hater...
    I never knew this...

  • no #74 4 years ago

    I haven't played any of the worms games for a while, but i have huge amounts of respect for any dev that's willing to come and discuss their decisions on a public forum like this. I'll be picking up a copy so I can come back here and be obnoxious about all the things you did wrong :p

  • dsmx #75 4 years ago

    No your going to buy a copy of this game at the RRP of £40? This game might be worth £15 tops, I can't see anything in it that warrents a £40 price tag.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #76 4 years ago

    (Take2's Carnival Games sells very well despite the hard-core dismissing it, for e.g.)

    This, incidentally, is because the hardcore are tits.

  • LetsGo #77 4 years ago

    >(Take2's Carnival Games sells very well despite the hard-core dismissing it, for e.g.)

    Its seling wel as its like £9 in the shops!

  • RandomTerrain #78 4 years ago

    I really really would like to see Worms World Party for the PS3. That would be truly excellent, and I know many who agree with me.
    Please, please make it happen. Just a straight port onto the PSN would be great!
    Dreams of concrete donkeys, sheep strikes, super banana bombs, etc.

  • dsmx #79 4 years ago

    Don't forget postal strikes, napalm strikes, holy hand grenades, old women, mad cows, skunk, pistol, long bow, ming vase, etc.

  • Durandle #80 4 years ago

    This is a shame, I always liked the older Worms games. This could have worked out better... this concept of aiming at a wider demographics meaning dumming it down seems a bit insane. Having a lot of weapons or more variety or any of the things people have complained about being missing would not make the game 'hardcore' and thus less appealing to casual gamers - thats crazy thinking. Casual gamers like variety and silly weapons as much as anyone. And the logic behind 'Wii gamers being younger' is a bit of a reverse issue. If you make a bunch of games aimed at a younger audience then oddly, yes, you get younger players. I think pretty much everyone I know has a Wii or wants one, and none of them are younger than 20.

  • Sl1pstream #81 4 years ago

    So why would you play Worms 2 after playing Worms Armageddon?

  • smelly #82 4 years ago

    @Durandle: Well said.

  • sneetch #83 4 years ago

    "To make matters worse, the control system makes the weapons a chore to use. The pointer sticks to the edge of the screen if you're more than a metre and a half away from the telly. It jerks around on menu screens."

    Umm, have you checked your Wii remotes batteries?

  • Daikon #84 4 years ago

    Another system, another Worms...
    But Team17 are not just re-making Worms. They're doing the next Leisure Suit Larry game...

    Guys, how about a new Alien Breed? Project X? Superfrog? Hello???

  • Marchax #85 4 years ago

    I 100% disagree with this review. Why, i've played the game myself, and i pretty much enjoyed it. I'm a member of the official Team 17 forum, and few weapons is not a bad thing, don't forget that creating loads of weapons would make the controls confusing, and easy to forget.

    Its not better than WA, but your review is one word: WRONG.