Support NeoGAF

[dark10x]

The pointer is accurate, its just not implemented that way in RedSteel, if you play Wiiplays shooting range, you would understand what i mean. From the sound of it, you havent played Redsteel much, or maybe you have played it, but just suck at it. No way could this game be played with a dual analog setup, you wouldt even get past the later levels, its a fast action title and the enemies are everywhere, above and below, which would be very frustrating to play with dual analogs.

I think it is YOU who sucks at dual analog, as I've played a great number of games with a dual analog setup which require accuracy.

I've played about 2-3 hours of Red Steel, 30 minutes of CoD3 (which was much better), and plenty of other games which require the pointer. The pointer is not bad, but it is not as accurate as a mouse.

I did not struggle with Red Steel (outside of the hand adjustment thing), but I did not find the control scheme to be anything worthwhile. A mouse could do a better job and a dual analog setup would be perfectly fine.

 

[MasterMFauli]

Because pressing A to nullify it sucks.
And because they can use the buttons for other (more important) functions.

And move your PC-mouse up to nullify doesnt suck? Uh oh...
The usual PC-fps does use 2 mouse-buttons for active battle. left mouse-button for shooting, right mouse-button for second function. On Wii, you´d fire with B, and second function and even reloading could be done by movement. Reloading in Call of Duty 3 for Wii actually is great by throwing the wiimote up back.
This type of control would be so much more intuitive than the square-box.
If you honestly think this sucks, then i think you cannot imagine what i mean.

 

[Eric_S]

[I haven't gotten my Wii yet]

What I would like to see for a movement scheme would be to (of course) use the analouge nub on the nunchuck for movement (back, forward, etc), and use the Wiimote for turning, with a programmable zero-movement box/turning speed/sensetivety.

Now, use a button on the nunchuck for "locking" you position allowing you to strafe and aim over the whole window without problems. Couple this with a quick turn mechanism where if you are in strafe mode you can turn the nunchuck backwards and you do an imediate 180 degree turn, if you turn it to the sides you do a 45 degree turn in the corresponding direction. And being able to set the sensetivety on the accelerometer on the nunchuck would be nice, as would some options on what happens once you go out of strafe dou you start turning immediately if your pointer happens to be at a corner, do you want it to wait a second, do it imediately but progressevely?

The above would IMO be nicer if the nub on the nunchuck could be clickable ala the dualchock, ie if you press it down you pin your character to that position, but again, that's just an opinon piece.

[/I haven't gotten my Wii yet]

 

[ksamedi]

I think it is YOU who sucks at dual analog, as I've played a great number of games with a dual analog setup which require accuracy.

I've played about 2-3 hours of Red Steel, 30 minutes of CoD3 (which was much better), and plenty of other games which require the pointer. The pointer is not bad, but it is not as accurate as a mouse.

I did not struggle with Red Steel (outside of the hand adjustment thing), but I did not find the control scheme to be anything worthwhile. A mouse could do a better job and a dual analog setup would be perfectly fine.

I never claimed it was more accurate than the mouse, and everyone with a PS2 played with dual analog setups the past 5 years, so its not that i suck, and from the look of it you dont suck at the Wiimote either, but you forget to mention that dual analog games have the enemies strategically placed so you can aim at them without any trouble, its a decent solution, but no where near the precision, immersion and fun of the Wiimote solution. FPS developers have much more freedom with level design (not in the graphics department) on the Wii than any other console.

 

[Branduil]

You can be accurate with dual analog because pretty much every single dual analog game has some sort of auto-aim mechanic.

 

[maxmars]

You can be accurate with dual analog because pretty much every single dual analog game has some sort of auto-aim mechanic.

Eh, I always disable it as it smells of "Win" button.

Moving with the Nunchuck, aiming with the Wiimote is ok. COD 3 controls very well, it's true that isn't fluid as the dual analog and precise as the mouse, but I will gladly accept its limitations as I've never liked dual analog (although games like timesplitters were good nonetheless).

Also, it's a good approximation of carrying around a weapon (at least as far as games are concerned) so I'm cautiously optimistic.

 

[No6]

Yes, more power means less constraints, that is for sure and I eagerly await to be blown away by modern PC FPSs (I'm a PC gamer myself). But at the same time that does not exhaust all possible paths of innovation.

I'm not saying that it does. I am saying that the power bottleneck in the Wii will most likely block many potential FPS innovation gains from the controller.

Uh if you don't see how to put to good use such features, you aren't trying very hard my friend!

First off the wiiconnect24 is not necessarily synonym with dedicated server. It would be much more interesting if it was exploited as a personal persistent world..

...which is basically the same thing as a dedicated server or MMO server. The point isn't that the idea is bad, but rather that the Wii is not unique in having the ability to do this (all the consoles could conceivably do this), and as a result would be the least ideal console for the situation. Hell, if you're talking about what I think you are, I can do it right now on my 360 with Viva Pinata.

A few possible gameplay hints:

- a DS is used as ...

Most of these come across as gimmickry, and doable by the PS3/PSP (or 360/Zune?).

 

[maxmars]

I'm not saying that it does. I am saying that the power bottleneck in the Wii will most likely block any innovation gains from the controller.

I don't think so (being so underpowered that it negates every advantage it may have). We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, at least for the time being as the library is still pretty thin.

...which is basically the same thing as a dedicated server or MMO server. The point isn't that the idea is bad, but rather that the Wii is not unique in having the ability to do this (all the consoles could conceivably do this), and as a result would be the least ideal console for the situation. Hell, if you're talking about what I think you are, I can do it right now on my 360 with Viva Pinata.

No, the Wiiconnect24 is something different from a ded server, yes it's similar to an MMO server, which makes it very cool. People can just "turn off" their Wii and it still runs, consuming very little power, making very little noise, so that other people in the family won't complain if it's operating.

Most of these come across as gimmickry, and doable by the PS3/PSP (or 360/Zune?).

As for not being unique to the Wii/DS, well, it was not what we were discussing. You asked me to provide examples of how an FPS can be innovative without recurring to more power and I provided such examples. Or did I misunderstand your reasoning?

As for the "gimmickry" I guess it's another item where we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[jwj442]

Some people still have hope that a proper control method for FPS using the Wii-mote will be developed.

It's already been done with the Monkey War minigame. The controls are excellent, even though the game itself is a very minimalist deathmatch FPS.

 

[dark10x]

I never claimed it was more accurate than the mouse, and everyone with a PS2 played with dual analog setups the past 5 years, so its not that i suck, and from the look of it you dont suck at the Wiimote either, but you forget to mention that dual analog games have the enemies strategically placed so you can aim at them without any trouble, its a decent solution, but no where near the precision, immersion and fun of the Wiimote solution. FPS developers have much more freedom with level design (not in the graphics department) on the Wii than any other console.

There are a few mistakes there...

1) The Dual Shock is a terrible FPS controller. The sticks simply aren't geared for it. The XBOX360 and SIXAXIS are vastly superior.

2) I have also played a number of PC FPS titles with a dual analog scheme. Why? Change of pace. I have little trouble with it.

3) Freedom with enemy placement? Come on, now, you really don't believe that, do you? If anything, the Wii would actually limit the levels themselves and what can be achieved with them (and I'm not speaking strictly in terms of visuals here). AI, interactions, etc. all suffer.

I do not believe that enemy placement has suffered as a result of dual analog. The only enemies that would become more challenging with such a setup are those that move around at incredibly high speeds in all directions. Those aren't exactly the type of foes I am interested in fighting, however, regardless of the control scheme and it would be plenty difficult with the Wii-mote.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

Ha, its still 10 000 times better than dual analog control, and ResSteel has pretty good controls besides the zoom thing, im not having trouble at all to shoot the bas guys. I cant see how its a total faillure, the Wiimote actually makes a pretty flawed game very fun to play.

I love nintendo to guys, we don't need to love them to the point of defending the time ubisoft took a shit on their machine though.

Red steel controls poorly and that's that.
Try to imagine master chief vs red steel dude in a 'you have your controller, I'll have mine' battle.

Drum it up as 'but it's a different game style!' all you want, but you'd be wrong, red steal controls like piss and sometimes I get a bit offended while playing it. I'm going to beat it anyway, if only so I so I can call it crap with more validity, but at over 2 hours into it, it's still a hassle to control and I didn't have that problem with halo.

 

[Squeak]

Because pressing A to nullify it sucks.
And because they can use the buttons for other (more important) functions.

Surely lifting a mouse is a more demanding gesture than pressing a button!
And more important functions?!? Surely there is nothing more important in an action game, than being able to control your character well?

My previous post obviously got overlooked, so let me write it again: Go play with the globe in Weather Channel or the dungeon map in Twilight princes, and right there you have the perfect interface for FPS control.
Although I would prefer if you had to press the A button (or one of the four other potential buttons) to let go, instead of grabbing the screen.
If the sensitivity is set high enough, that would mean that turns below ~ 45 degrees wouldn't require you to do anything other that move you wiimote.

Bounding box controls is the most retarded ting ever invented. Basically the movement of your character is like a large, extremely worn out (giant dead spot in the center) analog stick. Only there is no tactile indication of how much force you are exerting on the "stick" (no spring), so you have to at all times keep visual track of where you pointer is at, even when just navigating and not doing any shooting, which is probably 80 to 90 percent of the game.

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

I never claimed it was more accurate than the mouse, and everyone with a PS2 played with dual analog setups the past 5 years, so its not that i suck, and from the look of it you dont suck at the Wiimote either, but you forget to mention that dual analog games have the enemies strategically placed so you can aim at them without any trouble, its a decent solution, but no where near the precision, immersion and fun of the Wiimote solution. FPS developers have much more freedom with level design (not in the graphics department) on the Wii than any other console.

What?

LMAO

How exactly has dual analog done anything in regards to enemy position? It hasn't. Go play a free radical game and then tell us that enemy positions were placed strategically around the map, because we were using the dual shock.

I like the wii controller for fps. I really do. However, not a single developer has gotten the turning aspect down yet. Sure aiming and reloading is much more fun (sometimes irritating), but, turning is still assy and worse than that of the dual shock. Say what you want about analog controllers, but, they are fine when it comes to fps.

 

[dark10x]

Although I would prefer if you had to press the A button (or one of the four other potential buttons) to let go, instead of grabbing the screen.

I had thought about that as well.

Personally, I don't think it would work well for an FPS, but I DO think it would fit an adventure game. A Myst-like game might actually work well on the Wii as motion control could allow for all sorts of neat gadgets and puzzles.

I wonder if the Wii could deliver something similar to RealMYST (visually)?

 

[Branduil]

I don't really see how anyone could prefer dual analog for FPS to anything, but that's just my opinion. CoD 3 is a port and I found it's controls a million times better than any dual analog FPS. After a few minutes turning was not difficult at all.

 

[Flipmo23]

I think that with the correct control scheme, a Timesplitters Wii Online FPS would be unstoppable. Only thing in the way would be Nintendo's wussy interface, I can just imagine how limiting it would be.

But good lord, TS online with a MP3:C-like control scheme would absolutely own.

 

[dark10x]

I don't really see how anyone could prefer dual analog for FPS to anything, but that's just my opinion. CoD 3 is a port and I found it's controls a million times better than any dual analog FPS. After a few minutes turning was not difficult at all.

A million times better?

Have you tried it on XBOX360? I can't imagine anyone preferring the Wii version. The game itself suffers greatly on the Wii and pulls you out of the experience.

I can't imagine anyone really struggling with the 360 controller in CoD3. It plays beautifully on 360. I can understand preferring the Wii-mote, but does that bit of extra control make up for the downgrade in every other area of the game?

I think that with the correct control scheme, a Timesplitters Wii Online FPS would be unstoppable.

TS would be a good fit, I'd think. I believe Free Radical is working on a 360/PS3 title, however.

 

[Branduil]

A million times better?

Have you tried it on XBOX360? I can't imagine anyone preferring the Wii version. The game itself suffers greatly on the Wii and pulls you out of the experience.

I can't imagine anyone really struggling with the 360 controller in CoD3. It plays beautifully on 360. I can understand preferring the Wii-mote, but does that bit of extra control make up for the downgrade in every other area of the game?

I played the multiplayer on the 360. Trying to get headshots was incredibly awkward. I didn't notice any downgrades on the Wii except graphically but I haven;t played the whole game. But I prefer pixel-perfect accuracy to shuffling around with an analog stick.

 

[jwj442]

You guys should really play the Monkey War minigame. If a company releases a full FPS that controls like Monkey War does, it'll be great.

 

[dark10x]

I played the multiplayer on the 360. Trying to get headshots was incredibly awkward. I didn't notice any downgrades on the Wii except graphically but I haven;t played the whole game. But I prefer pixel-perfect accuracy to shuffling around with an analog stick.

1) Are you even familiar with the dual analog setup, though? I certainly have no issues pulling off headshots on the 360 pad and there are hoards of players who are much better at it than I. It's simply not that difficult.

2) I wouldn't say the Wii feature pixel perfect aiming as the accuracy when dealing with subtle motions is still not on par with a mouse. It's closer, but not quite there.

Once again, are you saying that you prefer a massively downgraded version of a game with Wii controls? CoD3 on the Wii is missing entire modes, loses some of the action, looks, runs, and sounds significantly worse, and general ends up feeling inferior. Do the controls completely make up for that in your case?

 

[Thraktor]

It's already been done with the Monkey War minigame. The controls are excellent, even though the game itself is a very minimalist deathmatch FPS.

Very much agreed. Red Steel (or the little I played of it) didn't strike me as particularly bad control wise, just something that could be improved upon. Monkey War, however, worked perfectly and was as intuitive and accurate an FPS set-up as I've played on a console. It even handled what seems to be a faster pace than Red Steel without problems. Granted, it's only a mini-game and it's difficult to extrapolate such an experience to a full-scale FPS, but it certainly shows promise.

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

I played the multiplayer on the 360. Trying to get headshots was incredibly awkward. I didn't notice any downgrades on the Wii except graphically but I haven;t played the whole game. But I prefer pixel-perfect accuracy to shuffling around with an analog stick.

The only thing good about wii CoD3 is the aiming, reloading, and switching weapons. Oh, and being able to play comfortably. Everything else from the turning to the lack of anything multiplayer, multiple instances of slowdown/frames dropping, graphics, etc... is worse on the Wii version. I like the game, but it has a boatload of faults.

 

[Thraktor]

1) Are you even familiar with the dual analog setup, though? I certainly have no issues pulling off headshots on the 360 pad and there are hoards of players who are much better at it than I. It's simply not that difficult.

The difference is that someone with no experience of Wii FPS controls can pull off head-shots straight away. While it's no doubt possible with a dual-analog setup, there's a steep learning curve to get to that point and I don't think that kind of curve exists with a good Wiimote control scheme.

 

[dark10x]

The difference is that someone with no experience of Wii FPS controls can pull off head-shots straight away. While it's no doubt possible with a dual-analog setup, there's a steep learning curve to get to that point and I don't think that kind of curve exists with a good Wiimote control scheme.

That's kind of my argument, though.

For those of us familiar with the dual analog setup, the Wii really brings nothing to the table. It's easier to pick up, but we have to put up with a whole slew of other limitations. The Wii version of Call of Duty 3 is significantly worse than the XBOX360 game and received attention only as a result of its control scheme. Does an input device, in and of itself, warrant such downgrades?

I'm not even positive that you are correct as I have seen a beginner try both CoD3 and Red Steel. They had some fun, no doubt, but they struggled like you wouldn't believe (the camera was all over the place). They weren't any good with dual analog either, but at least faired a bit better in that they weren't wildly swinging the camera all over the place.

 

[Branduil]

1) Are you even familiar with the dual analog setup, though? I certainly have no issues pulling off headshots on the 360 pad and there are hoards of players who are much better at it than I. It's simply not that difficult.

I'm familiar with dual analog. It's simply not as fast as the Wiimote.

2) I wouldn't say the Wii feature pixel perfect aiming as the accuracy when dealing with subtle motions is still not on par with a mouse. It's closer, but not quite there.

It's pixel-perfect as far as pointing is concerned. It's still not as good as a mouse but it's a step above everything else.

Once again, are you saying that you prefer a massively downgraded version of a game with Wii controls? CoD3 on the Wii is missing entire modes, loses some of the action, looks, runs, and sounds significantly worse, and general ends up feeling inferior. Do the controls completely make up for that in your case?

I wouldn't buy either game because I'm tired of WWII shooters.

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

The difference is that someone with no experience of Wii FPS controls can pull off head-shots straight away. While it's no doubt possible with a dual-analog setup, there's a steep learning curve to get to that point and I don't think that kind of curve exists with a good Wiimote control scheme.

They really can't. I was suprised by the learning curve in call of Duty. It is a lot harder to jump into that using the dual analog...

 

[dark10x]

I wouldn't buy either game because I'm tired of WWII shooters.

Say this situation occured with a game you WOULD buy...

You have an XBOX360 version with vastly superior visuals, more content, better AI, enhanced level design, and other such features on one hand with a vastly INFERIOR Wii version offering nothing outside of motion controls. Which would you select and why?

To me, it seems as if people are so caught up in the Wii-mote that they are willing to accept an inferior product.

 

[Branduil]

Say this situation occured with a game you WOULD buy...

You have an XBOX360 version with vastly superior visuals, more content, better AI, enhanced level design, and other such features on one hand with a vastly INFERIOR Wii version offering nothing outside of motion controls. Which would you select and why?

To me, it seems as if people are so caught up in the Wii-mote that they are willing to accept an inferior product.

If someone puts out a crappy gimped port I'm not going to buy it. This seems like an incredibly dumb question to me. Would you buy Rayman Raving Rabbids for the 360 if it had enhanced visuals?

 

[dark10x]

If someone puts out a crappy gimped port I'm not going to buy it. This seems like an incredibly dumb question to me. Would you buy Rayman Raving Rabbids for the 360 if it had enhanced visuals?

Of course not. However, I was very disappointed that the creation of Raving Rabbids essentially robbed us of a true successor to Rayman 2. Twisted thinking, I know, but such is the Wii for mii.

I'm thrilled to see that you do not feel that way, but it seems pretty clear that many others are willing to accept a lower quality product provided they are able to use motion control.

 

[Branduil]

Of course not.

I'm thrilled to see that you do not feel that way, but it seems pretty clear that many others are willing to accept a lower quality product provided they are able to use motion control.

Maybe they like dual analog even less than me. Or maybe they don't care about graphics or multiplayer. I see no reason to begrudge them their preferences.

 

[dark10x]

Maybe they like dual analog even less than me. Or maybe they don't care about graphics or multiplayer. I see no reason to begrudge them their preferences.

Their preferences may influence publishers, if you know what I mean.

If so, we end up with a Rayman situation (as I edited in above).

 

[LCGeek]

Dark I think you give dual analog controllers for fps too much credit. Going from what works to a setup that is never responsive from what I use too, lack of buttons, forced auto aim most of the time, and in general is not nearly precise isn't what I call fun. Can I play dual analog games, sure but they wear thin on me about 45 minutes into it for a variety of reasons.

Yet the way you are benchmarking Wii games is a little unfair. COD3 despite decent controls is a half assed port as activision made no attempt to make decent graphics, add meaningful content, and the Wiimote elements seemed more like a gimmick than a real attempt to make use of what it offered. RS when you tweak it isn't bad either, I certainly in 5 hours of playing of it feel its better than dual analog. The curve definetly wasn't as steep as dual analog because 90 mins into RS I was able to aim more effectively similar to what I had before I started using MX mice from logitech. Had the controls in COD3 and RS been more tweakable, something dual analog and pc enjoy it easily could've been a better experience. I hope devs program a set of quick canned animations that one user can select for functions of fps to give us more abilities but without needing to add a ton of buttons. Farcry seems to work as well from what I hear, despite it's crappy gutted graphics. SMB and elebits definetly have schemes that with a good dev could be quite useful in a full fps.

 

[dark10x]

Can I play dual analog games, sure but they wear thin on me about 45 minutes into it for a variety of reasons.

I have no problems, though, and I'd imagine a large percentage of those millions of Halo owners do not either.

 

[LCGeek]

I have no problems, though, and I'd imagine a large percentage of those millions of Halo owners do not either.

Halo has auto-aim that can't be turned off, the main reason next to it's speed as to why I stopped playing 4 months after getting into it locally. Using a smart joy frag didn't help, but I found most halo owners really don't know any better. The fact it uses auto aim suggest that dual analog isn't exactly the best option for fps games.

 

[dark10x]

Halo has auto-aim that can't be turned off, the main reason next to it's speed as to why I stopped playing 4 months after getting into it locally. Using a smart joy frag didn't help, but I found most halo owners really don't know any better. The fact it uses auto aim suggest that dual analog isn't exactly the best option for fps games.

What exactly is wrong with autoaim in that case?

We know the control scheme is not as accurate, but if it FEELS good...what's the problem? Outside of saying "Hey, I don't even need autoaim", what does it buy you? If the game plays smoothly, that's all that matters...right?

 

[Branduil]

What exactly is wrong with autoaim in that case?

We know the control scheme is not as accurate, but if it FEELS good...what's the problem? Outside of saying "Hey, I don't even need autoaim", what does it buy you? If the game plays smoothly, that's all that matters...right?

Some people prefer to kill things through skill alone. Weird I know.

 

[dark10x]

Some people prefer to kill things through skill alone. Weird I know.

Then use a mouse!

Fast paced multiplayer = PC (more accuracy)
Slower paced cinematic FPS = console (smoother panning)

The autoaim in Halo allows everyone to play (sound familiar?). There are plenty of folks who have no troubles with dual sticks without autoaim (myself included). That would be significantly more difficult for the masses to handle, however.

The Wii-mote offers improved accuracy, no doubt about it. If only it were coupled with a machine that could do it justice...

 

[Krowley]

Say this situation occured with a game you WOULD buy...

You have an XBOX360 version with vastly superior visuals, more content, better AI, enhanced level design, and other such features on one hand with a vastly INFERIOR Wii version offering nothing outside of motion controls. Which would you select and why?

To me, it seems as if people are so caught up in the Wii-mote that they are willing to accept an inferior product.

I've heard multiple times that AI is not currently constrained by processing power.. It's basicly an issue were better AI makes games too hard.

Some of the best AI i've ever seen was Halo's AI... It's still better than most pc FPS games. Very realistic and smart enough to be fun.

Another example is fan made bots for quake 2 (and probably quake 1) that were nearly unbeatable for a normal player.

Level design also doesn't seem to be overly constrained by processing power.. Team fortress has some of the best multiplayer maps ever and so does counterstrike. Has there been a next gen game with better level design than metroid prime?

Content... Well i haven't seen a next gen game with more content than morrowind or GTA san andreas... When you find one, maybe i'll agree. With all the fancy graphics slowing down development time, most games seem to end up with less content. I think there is only one next gen game with more content than zelda TP at the moment (oblivion) and supposedly it is shorter than morrowind.

I'll give you physics and obviously graphics. Next gen so far seems to be all about better looking versions of the same thing. I'm not saying that's nessecarily bad, but that's what it's about so far. Graphics and physics and the number of things you can render on screen are the big areas that have improved.

 

[Branduil]

Then use a mouse!

Fast paced multiplayer = PC (more accuracy)
Slower paced cinematic FPS = console (smoother panning)

The autoaim in Halo allows everyone to play (sound familiar?). There are plenty of folks who have no troubles with dual sticks without autoaim (myself included). That would be significantly more difficult for the masses to handle, however.

The Wii-mote offers improved accuracy, no doubt about it. If only it were coupled with a machine that could do it justice...

I do use a mouse. I also use a Wiimote. Both offer unique experiences that cannot be replicated by other controllers.

The Wii can do as much justice for an FPS as the Xbox did.

 

[dark10x]

I'll give you physics and obviously graphics. Next gen so far seems to be all about better looking versions of the same thing.

This is ALWAYS the case early on, though. You can't ignore the past here. Each generation leap is typically filled with pretty looking games created in the image of last generation. The innovative titles that could not have been done on previous hardware do not immediately appear as people have not necessarily THOUGHT of the ideas yet (or are working on them).

The Wii can do as much justice for an FPS as the Xbox did.

Sure, but that's not exactly enough anymore. Take a look at the mess that was Half-Life 2 on XBOX. Virtually unplayable next to the PC version. That was a 2004 game.

 

[Branduil]

This is ALWAYS the case early on, though. You can't ignore the past here. Each generation leap is typically filled with pretty looking games created in the image of last generation. The innovative titles that could not have been done on previous hardware do not immediately appear as people have not necessarily THOUGHT of the ideas yet (or are working on them).

Halo appeared right away. Was it not an innovative title?

Sure, but that's not exactly enough anymore. Take a look at the mess that was Half-Life 2 on XBOX. Virtually unplayable next to the PC version. That was a 2004 game.

That was a port. Do games suddenly become crap when improved graphics appear? Is Halo crap now?

 

[dark10x]

Halo appeared right away. Was it not an innovative title?

The XBOX was released almost three years into the previous generation (it started in 1998 with Sega Dreamcast). This current generation started just one year ago with XBOX360.

That was a port. Do games suddenly become crap when improved graphics appear? Is Halo crap now?

Of course not, but Halo would be IMPROVED by enhanced visuals. I believe the benefits of the Wii-mote will not make up for the fact that we will essentially be playing last generation games (visually) with it. The worlds presented in these games play a significant role in my enjoyment and visuals do have an impact there. By that nature, an FPS for the Wii with low quality visuals is automatically less appealing to me. I will have little interest in experiencing the world they are presenting to me.

Ocarina of Time used to be one of the most immersive games around. Going back to it, however, I can't believe that I was once impressed by it. The underlying gameplay is still solid enough...but all of the atmosphere is gone. Hyrule field is beyond ugly and kills the feeling of adventure. Technology is important here.

 

[LCGeek]

What exactly is wrong with autoaim in that case?

We know the control scheme is not as accurate, but if it FEELS good...what's the problem? Outside of saying "Hey, I don't even need autoaim", what does it buy you? If the game plays smoothly, that's all that matters...right?

Actually it doesn't play smoother as a result of me not being able to turn it off, in most fps games I aim neck head level and adjust because of the way it snaps it fights more than gives me what I intend on. Not that it's bad certainly didn't stop me from playing through the first Halo with it, though 2nd time was all SJF same with lan games I did. Although on the subject of Halo it's highly debateable as to what it did and didn't do I will leave it alone considering opening that can of worms is never good. What do you mean when you say panning it's still a little unclear in my head? Saying to use a mouse isn't a real solution especially when you look at how one can play halo or console only fps games. Last gen FPS wise was a total Pain because MS and Sony were complete cowards on making console players face the music when it comes to controllers for fps games.

 

[Model 500]

Red Steel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1ka2Kbuhak

 

[jwj442]

Well, I personally HATE dual-stick control. It gives me fits trying to use anything with a scope or score headshots in Halo or to aim at all in Gears, and I badly lose in multiplayer. That said, it's still better than Red Steel, but inferior to Monkey War, though I'm not sure if Monkey War is better than mouse/keyboard.