Wii U General Discussion

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

 

It's only really from the Wii onwards where in some cases, and increasingly so over the years that Nintendo has arguably focused more on gameplay and 'experiences' more, in trying to create more wider reaching games.

 

An aspect I strongly believe as a reason for their diminishing creativity.

 

Can't help but think how 'better' games like TP and SS could have been if they just focused on the core gameplay elements - not how many ways to swing a sword with a remote.

 

I actually feel a bit stupid now buying into the hype of motion controls, it did not improve the immersion aspect, and will never be as powerful as creating a great and original story - thats why OOT and MM are up there in glory.

Edited August 1, 2015 by King_V

[Goafer]

An aspect I strongly believe as a reason for their diminishing creativity.

 

Can't help but think how 'better' games like TP and SS could have been if they just focused on the core gameplay elements - not how many ways to swing a sword with a remote.

 

I actually feel a bit stupid now buying into the hype of motion controls, it did not improve the immersion aspect, and will never be as powerful as creating a great and original story - thats why OOT and MM are up there in glory.

 

*Controversial opinion incoming*

 

I remember thinking at the time that the Wii had set back gaming a decade or two. Games used to mainly be the territory of children and dorks due to their simple nature (it was all that was really possible back then), but the PS2/3 and XBox/360 were slowly starting to show the general public the story/world possibilities of gaming and that there was a mature* side to gaming as well.

 

Then the Wii came along and with it's massive success, reinforced the general public's view that it was simple experiences. Casual gaming was popular, but gaming as an actual hobby was once again seen as a thing for children and weird dorks. Things like Call of Duty etc don't help things either, as I imagine most people just think it's little boys playing soldiers, just via a console instead.

 

And this is a thing I see wrong with Nintendo as a whole. They never seemed to grow out of the 80s/90s era, where stories weren't really the main focus. The only problem is, the reason stories weren't as important back then is because technical limitations prevented truly immersive stories, so we had no choice but to make do with what we could get. Now that we can have voice acting, huge worlds, decent graphics and so much more, it's much easier to tell a proper story that people can get truly immersed in.

 

Gameplay is great, but some of us have been playing games for 20+ years and something would need to be drastically different for us to play something for gameplay alone. Mario Galaxy may have added the whole planet element, but it's still a platformer and I was playing platformers when I was pre-teen. I got bored of platformers when I was late teens, so something would have to be hugely different for me to come back. The same will happen to the CODs and the Fifas too eventually. If the core gameplay doesn't change, people will get bored eventually. Judging by the latest game in the series, this has already happened to Assassin's Creed.

 

A perfect example of exciting new gameplay is Rocket League. It's something completely new (To me at least. I'm aware of the precursor, obviously, but I've never played that), so that's a game I could happily play for gameplay alone. But I wouldn't play a platformer, shooter, action game or anything else just for the gameplay now, because I've experienced it countless times before in various forms.

 

This is why I value story and setting above gameplay. I can get to know new characters, explore new locations, experience new plot twists etc, all of which have a lasting effect and keep me thinking long after I've turned the game off. Obviously bad gameplay can ruin a game, but good story/average gameplay is much more appealing to me than average story/good gameplay.

 

All this is just my opinion, obviously (especially the Wii ruining stuff, which I'm not 100% sure on etc) and each to their own etc, but it does seem that the market has moved on. As much as I admire Nintendo for sticking to their core concept, it means nothing if they can't get enough success to stay in business. If I were to think of a way to turn things around, I'd probably want them to keep their quality and polish, but maybe try adding in deeper stories. They don't need to be gritty or hard hitting, but something fitting for the setting (Skies of Arcadia is a good example of a decent story and exciting game world, but without resorting to hard hitting scenarios etc). I actually like the look of the new Zelda, since the world looks amazing, but without a good, deep story to guide me through it, I fear it will just be another game I'll ignore.

 

 

 

*Mature as in grown up storytelling etc, not as in violence etc.

[dazzybee]

Game play is overrated.

Value story over gameplay.

 

Oh boy... This is getting beyond silly. How anyone can say these things baffles me somewhat, want story to enhance gameplay, fine, but prefer it, WRONG MEDIUM!

 

And Wii set gaming back 10 years? Oh boy... Can this discussion move to other boards or general gaming? Doesn't belong in Wii u thread does it? And it's getting quite painful to read.

[Ashley]

I'm quite happy to move it if people think it's for the best. I've not really been keeping an eye so not sure how this started and how intertwined it might be with a particular news story, which is why I've not just outright moved it so far.

 

In regards to the "wrong medium" scream; people used to say television is a place for mindless entertainment and film is for great story. Now it is commonly acknowledged that television has the possibility of outdoing film in terms of story. People also used to say films were just for visual spectacle (and I'm talking the 20's nickelodeons here, not CGI visual spectacles) and books were the source of true storytelling. And I'm sure probably at some point people said similar about books compared to spoken stories.

 

The point is things change. Be open to change. It might be that we're at the nadir of storytelling with games. It might be people out there find a way to help it outpace, at times, other mediums. Nothing is set in stone. Gaming is 30ish years old (depending on when you define it). Comparatively by this point cinema was still silent.

 

And once again there is no need to get so het up about people's opinions.

[Goafer]

Game play is overrated.

Value story over gameplay.

 

Oh boy... This is getting beyond silly. How anyone can say these things baffles me somewhat, want story to enhance gameplay, fine, but prefer it, WRONG MEDIUM!

 

It's not the wrong medium at all. How I enjoy games is entirely my own preference. And clearly developers agree, because I'm quite well catered for in terms of story driven games.

[dazzybee]

But you're changing what you said in an instant, it isn't about story driven games, I never said that was wrong, not once, Not implied it, not hinted at it. Same with Ashley's comment. Why do people use straw man arguments all the time... I guess people do anything to prove a point....

 

But preferring story over gameplay, that's what I said is the wrong medium, which it is. And no, developers clearly don't agree, as they make games, to play, and I bet a bulk of the development 99% of the time is about how the game plays then the story.

 

But this is about general gaming, so I definitely think it needs to be moved.

[Ashley]

But preferring story over gameplay, that's what I said is the wrong medium, which it is. And no, developers clearly don't agree, as they make games, to play, and I bet a bulk of the development 99% of the time is about how the game plays then the story.

 

There are plenty of games out there that use gameplay to move a story along, rather than using story to unpin gameplay. Heavy Rain, Never Alone, Everybody's Gone to Rapture etc.

 

Yes games are made to be played like films are made to be watched and books are made to be read. You can do more than just that though. To simplify it down to that level is depressing. Do you have no desire to see the medium explore its boundaries? To progress? To come up with anything new? Is what exists right now enough for you? The gameplay mechanisms in place? The story being, in your opinion, worth 1% of time? For someone that praises Nintendo for their desire to try new things in terms of hardware and inputs you seem to be awfully keen on saying nothing should be challenged in terms of the interplay between gameplay and story. And it is an interplay as it isn't a case that one can only have story or gameplay and it is being challenged by countless talented and driven people in the industry.

 

And yeah of course only 1% of the time developers think about story. That's why they don't have story writers, why they don't storyboard sequences, hire voice actors, adapt other works and why games like Zelda, Metroid Prime and Paper Mario spend 1% on the story. Obviously.

[Goafer]

But you're changing what you said in an instant, it isn't about story driven games, I never said that was wrong, not once, Not implied it, not hinted at it. Same with Ashley's comment. Why do people use straw man arguments all the time... I guess people do anything to prove a point....

 

I'm not changing anything. I have always said that, to me, story is more important, not that gameplay is irrelevant. I've never said that gameplay can completely be ignored, other wise I'd be playing Night Trap and visual novels.

 

But preferring story over gameplay, that's what I said is the wrong medium, which it is. And no, developers clearly don't agree, as they make games, to play, and I bet a bulk of the development 99% of the time is about how the game plays then the story.

 

In your opinion, of course.

[dazzybee]

There are plenty of games out there that use gameplay to move a story along, rather than using story to unpin gameplay. Heavy Rain, Never Alone, Everybody's Gone to Rapture etc.

 

Yes games are made to be played like films are made to be watched and books are made to be read. You can do more than just that though. To simplify it down to that level is depressing. Do you have no desire to see the medium explore its boundaries? To progress? To come up with anything new? Is what exists right now enough for you? The gameplay mechanisms in place? The story being, in your opinion, worth 1% of time? For someone that praises Nintendo for their desire to try new things in terms of hardware and inputs you seem to be awfully keen on saying nothing should be challenged in terms of the interplay between gameplay and story. And it is an interplay as it isn't a case that one can only have story or gameplay and it is being challenged by countless talented and driven people in the industry.

 

And yeah of course only 1% of the time developers think about story. That's why they don't have story writers, why they don't storyboard sequences, hire voice actors, adapt other works and why games like Zelda, Metroid Prime and Paper Mario spend 1% on the story. Obviously.

 

But this isn't what I said was bad. I loved heavy rain, 999, I'm playing zeros last reward now, I like uncharted 2 was like a cheesy blockbuster, I loved how gone home developed its story through your interactions in each room. I'm playing lifeline now which is a story text adventure on my apple watch. I've never denied story is a good thing, can be a great thing (though I think the level of writing is very poor). I also want games to continue to break out out and try new things, I embrace it and games that do different things I'm more likely to buy even if it's average. (Though I actually think the focus on story stunts this rather than part of being different. In the main).

 

I also never said story was worth 1% of development time, I really don't k ow what so many words and opinions and being attributed to me. I said I would say that in development this amount of time would be spent on story. Not that I think that's right.

 

All of this is a completely different discussion to 'gameplay is overrated' (which I think is an absurd thing to say) and 'story is more important than gameplay'. Not that story can't enhance (which ive said before and it got ignored) or anything, but just that they go against the medium.

 

It's like loving books and saying the paper quality is more important than the words

[Ashley]

It's like loving books and saying the paper quality is more important than the words

 

It's absolutely nothing like that. Nobody reads books for the paper quality. People do play games for the stories.

[Serebii]

It's absolutely nothing like that. Nobody reads books for the paper quality. People do play games for the stories.

 

Pfft. I'll have you know I refuse to read a book if the paper quality is poor

[david.dakota]

 

Story really is where Nintendo need to up their game; at best their games have dire story, at worst it is non-existent.

Edited August 1, 2015 by david.dakota

[Ashley]

Pfft. I'll have you know I refuse to read a book if the paper quality is poor

 

And presumably if there's too few pictures.

 

[Serebii]

And presumably if there's too few pictures.

 

Really annoying when the pictures don't pop up, too

[dazzybee]

It's absolutely nothing like that. Nobody reads books for the paper quality. People do play games for the stories.

 

I know people who refuse to buy anything but hardbacks. Some people detest hardbacks. Some people hate long books and some short. Some people only like horro book, crime books, comedy books. Some people have these weird preferences and needs in their book buying buying/reading. But the words will always be the most important thing.

 

In the same way some people only want to play online,, or only want shooters, or, even only want to play story focussed games...

[Goafer]

But the words will always be the most important thing.

 

[Pestneb]

It's absolutely nothing like that. Nobody reads books for the paper quality. People do play games for the stories.

 

you know I do have to say, if I had a choice between that rough yellowish thin paper cheaper books tend to go for, or nice laminated smooth and weighty paper.. I know which I would go for.

 

so that analogy is more like looking at the hardware involved in films (bluray, dvd... hd screen or sd... surround sound or mono...) or even games if you throw in the console/pc.

 

I know people who refuse to buy anything but hardbacks. Some people detest hardbacks. Some people hate long books and some short. Some people only like horro book, crime books, comedy books. Some people have these weird preferences and needs in their book buying buying/reading. But the words will always be the most important thing.

 

In the same way some people only want to play online,, or only want shooters, or, even only want to play story focussed games...

 

I quite like bd's. So the pictures are actually pretty important a lot of the time.

Also words in themselves aren't important, it is the ideas portrayed. But if we pursue this too far surely we'll need an other media board where we can discuss books...

[Iun]

I have to admit that I'm falling out of love with my Wii U. I did not find Smash as engaging as Melee or Brawl, MK8 is just obscenely frustrating with the excessive rubber-banding, I'm sort of enjoying Bayonetta 2 but it doesn't have much of a "wow" factor, Splatoon is pointless for me as I can barely get connected to the internet these days due to the Great Firewall of China and I have never enjoyed any of the Mario platformer games.

 

I want to enjoy the console, I spent a fortune on it, yet I can't find anything outstanding to truly love. Still, I'm looking forward to Zelda, I suppose.

[david.dakota]

If I had to pick...I guess I'd pick gameplay over story. But really, the gameplay would have to be detrimental to the experience to really bring a good story down. Relatively vanilla gameplay in combination with wonderful storytelling can create something as stunning as Uncharted 2. On the flip-side, technically brilliant gameplay can be utterly cold without a compelling narrative and compelling narratives are so rare in games. That's how I feel about most Nintendo games, tbh. Sure, the gameplay is stunning, but why should I care? Why does it deserve my incredibly valuable time if it's not going to try and connect with me on anything other than a mechanical level?

 

I picked up Far Cry 4 this year. Never really been a massive FC fan but I thought I'd give it a shot. And what a fucking antagonist. Absolutely superb. There's a bit at the end where you have the opportunity to kill him, but you know what, he was so charming, so well written, that I just let him escape – I had my finger on the trigger, I started to squeeze...and then I stopped myself. And that was a moment where I connected with a game and it was on a narrative level, it could only have been on a narrative level because that connection was borne out of a choice that was the result of hours upon hours of story - a story that all took place within the confines of arguably very unremarkable gameplay (that was a lot of fun, but there was literally nothing I hadn't seen before in it).

 

Gameplay is overrated.

 

The game I'm most looking forward to this year? Firewatch. Visually superb and narratively driven. And I'm pretty sure all you do is walk around and look at things.

 

 

 

I do agree that you can have a great story-driven game and have vanilla gameplay (great term, BTW) and, in fact, I think that's point of view shared by a massive audience; familiar controls with a cinematic experience. But to say Nintendo connects only at a level of basic input just really isn't a fair representation. Nintendo - at it's best - does connect at an emotional level through creative gameplay. I do agree that Nintendo need to craft deeper, more creative narrative but that doesn't mean what they currently do doesn't connect.

 

Gameplay overrated? I've a huge, huge problem with this sentence. Gameplay can never be overrated - but clearly it's clearly being under appreciated here. How you interect with a game is of the utmost importance, dull gameplay makes for a dull game no matter how good the story is. I'd understand if your gripe was some of the experimental stuff out there but a sweeping "Gameplay is overrated" statement just seems a little antagonistic.

[Daft]

I do agree that you can have a great story-driven game and have vanilla gameplay (great term, BTW) and, in fact, I think that's point of view shared by a massive audience; familiar controls with a cinematic experience. But to say Nintendo connects only at a level of basic input just really isn't a fair representation. Nintendo - at it's best - does connect at an emotional level through creative gameplay. I do agree that Nintendo need to craft deeper, more creative narrative but that doesn't mean what they currently do doesn't connect.

 

Gameplay overrated? I've a huge, huge problem with this sentence. Gameplay can never be overrated - but clearly it's clearly being under appreciated here. How you interect with a game is of the utmost importance, dull gameplay makes for a dull game no matter how good the story is. I'd understand if your gripe was some of the experimental stuff out there but a sweeping "Gameplay is overrated" statement just seems a little antagonistic.

 

I didn't mean gameplay is overrated in that way. I would say gameplay has reached a point of standardisation that removes a lot of the need for necessary innovation; a lot of controls layout and gameplay elements are standardised. Good narratives, and how they are implemented within games, is something that has much more space to grow.

 

When I think about it, the games that I have enjoyed most in the past couple years have been games like...

 

P.T. - atmosphere and environmental story

Far Cry 4 - pretty great writing and narrative choices involved

Valiant Hearts - basic puzzle platformer with a superb story

Destiny - I enjoy the lore, I know the game has its problems, but its world-building is one of the best things about it

The Order - Galahad is a babe, also loved the narrative lack of hand-holding (for the most part) and the world it created

Bloodborne - Another game with great lore and environmental story

Journey - arguably a game where you just press forward on the analogue stick a lot

Witcher 3 - phenomenal, and I usually hate fantasy games. This is what RPGs should strive to be like. Everything released from no one will be in its shadow.

 

Out of all of those, I think Bloodborne is the only one with truly spectacular gameplay and really, tight hit-boxes and great movement doesn't change the fact it is a hack and slash.

 

The last time I connected with a Nintendo game was Majora's Mask, to this day it's still probably my favourite game ever. And it isn't the gameplay that I remember fondly. Could you talk a little abut connecting with creative gameplay? I can't quite think of what you mean.

[Serebii]

I didn't mean gameplay is overrated in that way. I would say gameplay has reached a point of standardisation that removes a lot of the need for necessary innovation; a lot of controls layout and gameplay elements are standardised. Good narratives, and how they are implemented within games, is something that has much more space to grow.

 

When I think about it, the games that I have enjoyed most in the past couple years have been games like...

 

P.T. - atmosphere and environmental story

Far Cry 4 - pretty great writing and narrative choices involved

Valiant Hearts - basic puzzle platformer with a superb story

Destiny - I enjoy the lore, I know the game has its problems, but its world-building is one of the best things about it

The Order - Galahad is a babe, also loved the narrative lack of hand-holding (for the most part) and the world it created

Bloodborne - Another game with great lore and environmental story

Journey - arguably a game where you just press forward on the analogue stick a lot

Witcher 3 - phenomenal, and I usually hate fantasy games. This is what RPGs should strive to be like. Everything released from no one will be in its shadow.

 

Out of all of those, I think Bloodborne is the only one with truly spectacular gameplay and really, tight hit-boxes and great movement doesn't change the fact it is a hack and slash.

 

The last time I connected with a Nintendo game was Majora's Mask, to this day it's still probably my favourite game ever. And it isn't the gameplay that I remember fondly. Could you talk a little abut connecting with creative gameplay? I can't quite think of what you mean.

So because gameplay has stagnated that means it's no longer important? Because developers are choosing to sideline it rather than experiment with it, it makes it overrated?

 

You're just accepting that developers have sidelined the importance of gameplay and are ceasing innovation and are just falling into what they're saying.

[Daft]

I didn't say it stagnated. I said it was standardised.

 

Also, there are more than enough developers and games being released that as an industry we move in incremental amounts; most games take small steps to improve the gameplay experience and over the course of a year (or more likely a development cycle) the whole industry moves in strides. So yeah, I never said it stagnated, but the industry constantly revises what is standard and that's pretty normal for industries.

 

In fact, when choices are part of the narrative that narrative itself has become an important gameplay element.

[Serebii]

I didn't say it stagnated. I said it was standardised.

 

Also, there are more than enough developers and games being released that as an industry we move in incremental amounts; most games take small steps to improve the gameplay experience and over the course of a year (or more likely a development cycle) the whole industry moves in strides. So yeah, I never said it stagnated, but the industry constantly revises what is standard and that's pretty normal for industries.

 

In fact, when choices are part of the narrative that narrative itself has become an important gameplay element.

It becoming "standardised" is reason enough for developers to put a focus on it.

[Fierce_LiNk]

 

In fact, when choices are part of the narrative that narrative itself has become an important gameplay element.

 

This is what I was getting at earlier.

 

It becoming "standardised" is reason enough for developers to put a focus on it.

 

Do you know what standardised means?

 

Nintendo could do with a bit of this actually. Analogue shoulder triggers for example are important for racing games and shooters.

[Cube]

Sometimes, going with "standardised" gameplay elements can detract from a game, though. For example: Arkham City just felt a bit generic and was more of a "standard open city", whereas Arkham Asylum had an amazing atmosphere to it.