In the Defense of / An Offense Against (Wii edition)

[DarkLink1016]

Its quite simple, if more games CORRECTLY and EFFECTIVELY supported the Wii add ons, the quality and reception of these would be much better, making people's overall view of the Wii much better. Not saying their view of it is bad, but I know people outside the fanboy realm have problems with the ineffective-ness of the Wii's motion and the many many peripherals. Just make them a fun and interestingly integral part of the game experience, and you will have greater success than if you didn't. If your gonna waste your money and our money on this stuff, make it worthwhile. And yes Common Soldier, third party development is a huge part in deciding the success of these gimmick's used in games.

[Mariorockz! :D]

I prefer the Wii Wheel, I think I get a better grip of the remote when I turn it to whatever direction the Car or Kart or whatever needs to go, anyways, the other add ons, you guys are right, very pointless, when I got my Wii for christmas, my dad included all these add ons, and I never use them! (except the wheel) I mean really, we can bat without the bat top, we can hit a tennis ball without the netting top, I mean really....

And by the way, those batteries do get low, I have a charger, but it sucks, it doesnt charge the remote! So I gotta waste all our double AA batteries every 3 weeks or so...... not cool.

[MM Bro]

In my opinion, I think the Wii Motion Plus actually does give better control. It can make aiming at the TV a breeze, and will keep you from tapping on the wrong thing. It's also much better than going back and forth trying to touch the correct thing. It especially works for Wii Sports Resort, Link's Crossbow Training, Call of Duty, and just normal Wii Sports. Heck, it would also do great at helping you out at any party game!

But seriously, I HATE all of those stupid add-ons they got for it. Are people seriously gonna waste their money on a plastic tennis racket when it doesn't do ANYTHING? You can just swing your regular Wii remote and hit the ball. There's also the Wii baseball bat. Sure, it makes it feel like you're holding an actual bat, BUT WHAT'S THE POINT?! It's not like you've never held a bat in your life! Sure, SOME add-ons are okay, but these two, and a few more in particular, are terrible. They're a waste of your money, and useless.

[Common_Soldier]

It seems we all agree that the extra peripherals that are in the shape of sports/weapon tools (other than the zapper) are a big waste of time.
Now the question is, why exactly do we prefer the Wiimote by itself? Obviously we find the extra peripherals a waste since they don't add too much to the experience - but why are we offended by it if we don't use it? Is it because others purchase it?
One way to look at it: one of the charms of the Wiimote is the mimicry of the actions we see on the screen - a certain form of immersion that acts much like make-believe.
Now as an example I give a negative reaction: There are those that simply don't like the Wiimote due to the fact that its pointer isn't 100% accurate to the screen, these people prefer the original light gun controllers as the reticule is accurate to the angle and position their light gun's point is aiming.
However, why are there those who simply ignore this "flaw" in the Wiimote? Answer: Immersion. Many players don't aim their Wiimotes and Zappers at the direct location on the screen, they simply angle and move their Wiimotes to move the reticule on the screen. To them: The reticule is all they see, not their own hands. In this fashion, one could say that this crowd is much more immersed into the game than those who complain about it.
In this sense, many gamers don't see themselves as a human staring at the screen and moving the controller around and using their thumbs to press buttons - they see themselves as the character on the screen, and (when memorized and fluid) the controls are merely an extension of the character, not so much the player (there are a few exceptions, much like fighting-game tournament players).

So... when a company comes along and places a peripheral to add to a Wiimote to make it more "realistic" to a player "in real life", it might be an insult as it does nothing more than trying to convince the player that they're playing with a toy - not playing as the character on the screen.
It ruins the immersion by placing it on the wrong side of reality.

Perhaps? Not sure if that's how others feel.

[SMRPGFan]

Well, following example one, I am not like most others in the fact that I enjoy "bad" games such as Zelda II and Sonic Unleashed.

There is one thing I don't like about the Wii: The Wii Remote's batteries run out too fast.
(Sorry if I did this wrong.)

I do agree with you that the Wii Remote runs through batteries like no other. However, a lot of companies, like Nyko, have made a Wiimote charging station, complete with rechargeable batteries. Each station holds two Wiimotes and comes with two batteries that plug neatly into the battery compartment. It doesn't change the amount of time you can play with a Wiimote before it dies, but you'll save a ton of money on batteries. I would certainly suggest investing in one of these.

I used one of those, but the thing is, it broke.

[Shine Ninja]

It seems we all agree that the extra peripherals that are in the shape of sports/weapon tools (other than the zapper) are a big waste of time.
Now the question is, why exactly do we prefer the Wiimote by itself? Obviously we find the extra peripherals a waste since they don't add too much to the experience - but why are we offended by it if we don't use it? Is it because others purchase it?
One way to look at it: one of the charms of the Wiimote is the mimicry of the actions we see on the screen - a certain form of immersion that acts much like make-believe.
Now as an example I give a negative reaction: There are those that simply don't like the Wiimote due to the fact that its pointer isn't 100% accurate to the screen, these people prefer the original light gun controllers as the reticule is accurate to the angle and position their light gun's point is aiming.
However, why are there those who simply ignore this "flaw" in the Wiimote? Answer: Immersion. Many players don't aim their Wiimotes and Zappers at the direct location on the screen, they simply angle and move their Wiimotes to move the reticule on the screen. To them: The reticule is all they see, not their own hands. In this fashion, one could say that this crowd is much more immersed into the game than those who complain about it.
In this sense, many gamers don't see themselves as a human staring at the screen and moving the controller around and using their thumbs to press buttons - they see themselves as the character on the screen, and (when memorized and fluid) the controls are merely an extension of the character, not so much the player (there are a few exceptions, much like fighting-game tournament players).

So... when a company comes along and places a peripheral to add to a Wiimote to make it more "realistic" to a player "in real life", it might be an insult as it does nothing more than trying to convince the player that they're playing with a toy - not playing as the character on the screen.
It ruins the immersion by placing it on the wrong side of reality.

Perhaps? Not sure if that's how others feel.

When I used my Wii Zapper to play Battalion Wars 2, it felt more real than just using the Wii Remote and Nunchuck. I felt like I was aiming my weapon of choice rather than pointing the Wii Remote on the screen. The extra "gimmicks" on the other hand, I had some problems with. The reason why I like the Wii Zapper was because it didn't look like a gun. It acted like a gun in the game, but in real life, it was just a Zapper. One day when I was at GameStop, I saw a third party (can't remember which) "gimmick" version of the Wii Zapper and it looked like a pistol. I was thinking, "A pistol? This might send kids the wrong message," The Wii Zapper on the other hand is more complex than just a standard gun, but that wasn’t the only reason why I didn’t like the "gimmick" version. The Wii Remote was supposed to lie on top of the “gimmick” pistol, so what was the point of buying it, all it does is add extra weight. The Wii Zapper on the other hand, supported the Nunchuck, but didn’t rely on it. So if I needed the Nunchuck, it will be right in front of me.

The extra “gimmicks” like the lightsaber top and the tennis racket are just pointless. They don’t improve my gameplay; there are just add-ons I can look at. I don’t hate the add-ons because they make the Wii look like a toy; they are just a waste of money and time, simple as that. I rather buy another game than add-ons for one or two games.

As for the Vitality Sensor I mentioned earlier, I know Capcom and Altus will come up with something good, though I’m not too sure about Sega. I think the VS can be use like a health meter in Trauma Center, a lie detector in Ace Attorney, or something cool like that in another game. As long as the VS stay far, far, FAR away from Sonic, then I’m sure it won’t be a “gimmick” in the past.

[Common_Soldier]

Recently a new game has been revealed by EA, and already it's getting mixed reviews.

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/02/create-preview/

Now the reason why I'm posting this is because I'm sick and tired of people calling it an "LBP clone".
The news came out just today, and already people all over forums and blogs are calling it an "LBP clone" and dismissing it.

It's rather annoying.
So in defense of this new Create game:
This game is closer to The Incredible Machine than Little Big Planet.

I know most youngin's don't remember The Incredible Machine (despite it being rehashed several times throughout the years), but seriously, comparing everything where you create things in a 2D perspective as an "LBP clone" is ignorant and sad.
I know most people aren't a fan of history, but it always helps to look back to see where the ideas came from for all these new games. It really helps you move forward in the gaming culture instead of running in circles (many developers still make the same mistakes as past developers, don't aim to repeat history folks).

I mean if you have to claim that Create (a game where you create an assortment of puzzles that react on the physics of several themed objects) is a clone of LittleBigPlanet (a game where you create a 2D platformer game ::but not entirely restricted to that genre:: by using several craft-themed objects), you may as well say that LBP is a clone of Mario Bros. (seeing that the platforming aspect of LBP wouldn't have sold if SMB never sold).

I'll admit this game may be selling off the popularity of LBP, but in no way is it a rip-off of LBP. It's a business move, not an intellectual property one.

[Shine Ninja]

I never heard of Create and I never played Little Big Planet, so I can't say Create is a rip-off of LBP. After looking at the video, I have to admit both games are somewhat similar to each other, though I think Create stands out a little more. In LBP, you play as Sackboy. I don't know why, but I never really like Sackboy; I have nothing aganist him, he just seems kinda...I don't know, wrong. Now, I love creating and seeing my ideas come to life, that's why I draw after all. Creating my own character always brings joy in my gaming experience; I playing as a character I like from the get go instead of a character I have to get used to. Anyway, Create and LBP do look alike, straight down to the world map, but I won't say Create's a rip-off.

I haven't play LBP, but I have seen the gameplay. The gameplay is more like Goemon Great Adventure instead of Super Mario Bros. In SMB, you just go from left to right, but in GGA, you sometimes go up and down in the adventure and the end is not always on the right side of the screen. And I assume Create plays somewhat like LBP. Most likely, I wont get Create when it comes out, but I might rent it first to see if it's any good or not. Speaking of rip-offs, I also have an complaint. It's a little off topic, but it's similar to LBP and Create. Ever since Grand Theft Auto III came out, every sand-box game that came out is always compared to GTA III. It doesn't seem fair that a sand-box game has to be compare to GTA III just because it shares some ideas with GTA III. The same goes for God of War and Dynasty Warriors. I bet even the upcoming Sengoku Basara: Samurai Heroes will be compare to Dynasty Warriors in someway or another.

Which leads to my next defense: the game Sengoku Basara: Samurai Heroes, or Samurai Heroes 3 for short. The name might not sound familar because the US version of the original game is called Devil Kings and it's for the Playstation 2. Anyway, does anyone thinks this will be a hack-and-slash rip-off, or will if be something new and fresh? I believe that in Capcom's hands, Samurai Heroes 3 will stand out from the rest. And speaking of 3, Samurai Warriors 3 is also coming out for the Nintendo Wii. It's kinda like DW, but has a different gameplay feel to it.