New Reggie interview:

[Helmsly]

Interview with the San franciso chronicle:

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/28/BUM4SSC18.DTL

 

Q: Sony has turned their box into a DVD player with Blu-ray and Microsoft has done the same thing with HD-DVD. What do you think about this idea of dominating the living room.

 

A: We've sold 4 million Wiis in the U.S. We have, depending on the week, depending on the month, 50 to 60 percent of the Wii's Internet-connected. So when you talk about a box that is creating a living room experience tied to the Internet, we're doing it.

 

 

Q: Speaking of fitness, do you feel there is a social responsibility for the video game industry. Some people would say you've created a generation of couch potatoes. Do you see a moral obligation there?

 

A: We see a responsibility to have our players up and moving around. That's how Wii Sports was born, and the next idea in pushing that forward is Wii Fit. This is something that Miyamoto-san is passionate about in terms of creating - I wouldn't even call it a game - creating an experience that gives back to the player in ways that are physically beneficial and emotionally beneficial. It's something we are passionate about as a company.

 

 

Q: When you look at what other platforms are doing, is there a game that you say, "I wish we had that game. This might be a very interesting game on the Wii."

 

A: I've been very intrigued with Little Big Planet (from Sony). I don't know that it belongs on their platform. Microsoft has done well. There are a range of first-person shooter type games that are all very well done that could all do quite well on a Nintendo platform.

 

Certainly, the Halo trilogy - anyone who would look at that and say, "No, I think we could live without it," probably doesn't think real long about this industry.

 

Even games like BioShock. I thought that was tremendously well done. The writing was tremendously clever. I would love to see more of that type of content in the industry overall that actually makes people think a little bit.

[Maiky-NiSuTe]

always nice Reggie sure wants the thirt party's to jump on the Nintendo ship. and i don't blame him. indeed many shooters can be made for the Wiki and they will work great with the Wii mote. and Little Big Planet is one hell of a great game. i even bought my PS3 because of that game and only because of that game

[Patch]

This is something that Miyamoto-san is passionate about in terms of creating - I wouldn't even call it a game...

 

Yep, it's gonna sell millions for that very reason. Crafty lot.

[Hellfire]

Different to see him talking about other console games. Refreshing even.

[DCK]

Q: When you look at what other platforms are doing, is there a game that you say, "I wish we had that game. This might be a very interesting game on the Wii."

 

A: I've been very intrigued with Little Big Planet (from Sony). I don't know that it belongs on their platform. Microsoft has done well. There are a range of first-person shooter type games that are all very well done that could all do quite well on a Nintendo platform.

 

Certainly, the Halo trilogy - anyone who would look at that and say, "No, I think we could live without it," probably doesn't think real long about this industry.

 

Even games like BioShock. I thought that was tremendously well done. The writing was tremendously clever. I would love to see more of that type of content in the industry overall that actually makes people think a little bit.

Reggie is my hero again. He's absolutely right.

[darkjak]

If you want FPS games som friggin' much, why wont ya make one?

 

A Nintendo FPS, with Wifi multiplayer online, which pushes the Wii as far as Goldeneye did on the N64:

If Nintendo would do that, it'd be worth GOLD!

[The-chosen-one]

hey to be honest the graphics from goldeneye still look very good for a 64 game

[McMad]

Play it again, and then see how the framerate suffered because of those graphics.

[The Lillster]

Play it again, and then see how the framerate suffered because of those graphics.

 

I know. Back in the day though, things like frames per second didn't bother me.

[McMad]

I know. Back in the day though, things like frames per second didn't bother me.

 

lol same, I think about it now and wonder why it never bothered me so much back then.

[steggy]

lol same, I think about it now and wonder why it never bothered me so much back then.

It always bothered me, I think mainly because back in the days of the N64 I was more into PC gaming. And then if a game ran slow it ment it was time to upgrade, not having that option on a console really annoyed me if a console game ran slow.

[Cube]

hey to be honest the graphics from goldeneye still look very good for a 64 game

 

Unless you've played The World IS Not Enough.

[darkjak]

Play it again, and then see how the framerate suffered because of those graphics.

 

Yeah, but the framerate wasn't too low back in the day. I mean, that framerate back in 1997 is like 30fps today.

I mean, you complaining about GE's framerate today is allmost like pointing at the Commodore 64 and taking a crack at it being low def.

 

In ten years, people will be saying that MoH: Heroes 2 and its 60fps will be dog slow too (according to scientists the brain records its surroundings at somewhere over 100fps, don't remember if it was arround 120 or maybe 780). Today Bioshock is perhaps the best looking game arround, in ten years it'll be ancient. I mean, HL2 is 2 years old, and allready reviewers say that the textures are blocky when they review the Orange Box.

 

Goldeneye looks better than many modern games, because the design and textures are so good.

[Blue_Ninja0]

(according to scientists the brain records its surroundings at somewhere over 100fps, don't remember if it was arround 120 or maybe 780).

 

I could swear I've read that our eyes/brain can record a 60fps on an average person. Hence the 60 fps standard.

[Guest Jordan]

To the untrained eye, 60fps is the max it can read.

 

If however, you've played games for a while, you can quite easily 'see' over that. I can usually tell if a game is running better than 60fps. Over 100 though and its basically impossible.

[steggy]

To the untrained eye, 60fps is the max it can read.

 

If however, you've played games for a while, you can quite easily 'see' over that. I can usually tell if a game is running better than 60fps. Over 100 though and its basically impossible.

 

Not to mention most TV's are only setup to show 50 or 60 fps.

 

And IIRC most movies are 25fps.

 

I don't think fps really matters that much, as long as it's consistent. If something is running at 30fps it should stay at that framerate throughout the game. In my eye's slowdown on a console is pretty much unforgivable except in extreme circumstances.

 

IMO if a developer wants to have some really great graphics at the expense of framerate, they should have an option to turn those great graphics to normal graphics that run at a consistent frame rate.

 

Oh and at the time I thought Goldeneye had a horrendous framerate. But I was a bit of a PC snob at the time and looked down on consoles. I suppose you could say I was a "Hardcore" gamer and looked down on the "Casual" console games. I grew out of that

[Phube]

Not to mention most TV's are only setup to show 50 or 60 fps.

 

And IIRC most movies are 25fps.

 

 

 

That is true, which begs the question, why don't people moan about cinema frame rates??

[steggy]

That is true, which begs the question, why don't people moan about cinema frame rates??

 

Because they're consistent

[Phube]

Because they're consistent

 

 

So why is a 60fps game better than a 30fps game?? I still can't tell the difference....

[Patch]

That is true, which begs the question, why don't people moan about cinema frame rates??

 

Apparently, if this is true, its because each frame contains a small amount of blurring, which removes the jerkiness you might otherwise see. Kind of like the 'trails' option on many games these days. For the record, it's 24 fps.

[darkjak]

That is true, which begs the question, why don't people moan about cinema frame rates??

 

Because movies are covered in motion blur, so the framerate isn't obvious the way it is in games. Real MB has rarelly ever been made in games, the MB made in Perfect Dark, Lylat Wars and other games aint real motion blur, it's just multiplying the object in question...

[steggy]

Because movies are covered in motion blur, so the framerate isn't obvious the way it is in games. Real MB has rarelly ever been made in games, the MB made in Perfect Dark, Lylat Wars and other games aint real motion blur, it's just multiplying the object in question...

 

Didn't GTA3 have motion blur of sorts? Or was that my shitty 18ms response time on my Monitor?

[darkjak]

Didn't GTA3 have motion blur of sorts? Or was that my shitty 18ms response time on my Monitor?

 

Technically its not blur, it however is a blur-ish effect. It was used in Perfect Dark on the N64 too.

[steggy]

Technically its not blur, it however is a blur-ish effect. It was used in Perfect Dark on the N64 too.

 

Thought so, I was pretty sure my monitor wasn't as bad as that. Just think my monitor made it even blurrier.

 

Tut tut, I'll have to ask my boss to buy me a better monitor because I type line of code so fast my monitor is showing too much motion blur. Oh and while I'm at it I may aswell get a better graphics card...because the textures on the fonts arnt rendering fast enough. Damn I better come up with a better lie than that.