The biggest misconception about the Wii, according to Nintendo
February 25th, 2010 Posted in News, Posted by Valay, Wii“I think the biggest misconception may be that it’s only for expanded audiences. And I think that you see all kinds of people enjoying experiences on the Wii. And, certainly, whether it’s third-party games like Madden, like Guitar Hero, or whether it’s first-party games like New Super Mario Bros., there really is something for everyone to enjoy on the Wii.” – Cammie Dunaway
I always scratch my head when gamers say that there aren’t enough hardcore games for Wii. Sure, many companies produce casual software, but I feel like there’s enough titles for the core. Starting next month, there will be at least one “triple A” title to purchase up to June.
- David Pellas: The Conduit is Wii’s biggest online game, HVS is satisfied with sales Published on: September 15, 2009
- Zelda for DS is not the biggest surprise today Published on: March 25, 2009
- Nintendo’s biggest success and failure with the Wii Published on: February 6, 2009
- Super Mario Galaxy is 35% casual, SSBB is suited for the casual and hardcore Published on: June 16, 2008
- Nintendo News: NPD Reports Nintendo’s Solid U.S. Sales for February Published on: March 14, 2008
16 Responses to “The biggest misconception about the Wii, according to Nintendo”
By Meh on Feb 25, 2010
Saying it doesn’t make it true, Nintendo.
By bob on Feb 28, 2010
im tired of people saying the wii is a casual and kiddy system
By heartlessgamer on Feb 28, 2010
Its the Modern Warfare 2 problem. There is a very vocal minority that buys games like MW2 on a regular basis. They create huge sales numbers and get all of the attention. However, they are quickly shuffled off.
Yet, a year from now a game like SMB Wii will still be selling a ton of copies and the core gamers will be waiting on MW3. This is a direct result of Wii’s broader audience finding different games at different times. Therefore, it gets skewed that since MW2 beat SMB Wii in launch #s, Wii doesn’t have hardcore gamers which results in people assuming there aren’t hardcore games for the Wii, when in fact there is (but not just in sales volume of things like MW2).
By turtleguy on Feb 28, 2010
it is a kiddy system, but me and my roomate have put about 2 days into new super mario bros. wii
By LevelHead on Feb 28, 2010
Sure there’s lot to enjoy on the Wii but who exactly is enjoying it? Also who wants a dumbed down version of a game like Dead Space? The fact is sales suggest that it is mostly comprised of casual gamers and this vocal minority who pleads for hardcore games really aren’t a large part of the demographics.
By errant razor on Feb 28, 2010
“The fact is sales suggest that it is mostly comprised of casual gamers”
Sales of what?
When we get a real AAA third party core game on Wii, THEN you can talk about sales suggesting. But until then, it’s only specualation. Games like Madworld or the Conduit are not representative of who would buy a game like MW2 on the Wii if it actually came out.
By Topeka on Feb 28, 2010
I am sorry to tell you this but the Wii is a scourge on the console gaming generation. Valve director stated it perfectly, “Shitty party games”. I am a hardcore gamer and I do own a Wii but am severely disappointed in it. I would say 95% of the games are really casual games for a casual audience. Yes, there are some non-casual games like CD:WAW or the Conduit but even them are toned dow to fit the casual audience.
By Meesher on Feb 28, 2010
I’m surprised that, with so many old folks and parents, as well as kids, playing games ranging from WiiSR, Mario, RE Dark side, House of the Dead, Capcom vs Tatsunoko and soon Monser Hunter…there are still those paranoid righ res purists that desperately cling to the “teh Wiiz fer khidz” line of thinking.
True, a lot of kids play Mario, but a lot of kids whose parents couldn’t give a crap also play the mature rated games on PS360. Kids are everywhere these days, get over it, hug your console and suck your thumb.
By supagcn on Feb 28, 2010
lol @ all the fools who define a hardcore game as flashy graphics and blood. Its the gameplay and the dedication one needs to master a game. Look at the videos in the castle in NsmbWii. Now tell me that u can do that trying once? Exactly. there are alot of very good hardcore games on Wii, u just have to be a NINTENDO gamer to find them and not some dumb 12 year old kid who just started gaming. I don’t own a 360 but i know that Bayonetta, darksiders, etc are good games. Anyway enjoy your gaming!!!!!
By coolman229 on Feb 28, 2010
This is just people who think that they’re too old for Nintendo. Are we too old for Mario? Zelda? Metroid? Dynamic Slash(look it up)? And what about No More Heroes 1 and 2? Tatsunoko vs Capcom? Monster Hunter Tri? Little King’s Story? The list goes on. The whole “My Wii has been gathering dust” and “There are no good games on teh Wii” are just fanboys who don’t like the Wiimote.
By Hugh Isaacs II on Feb 28, 2010
The thing I find interesting is that with the 360 and PS3, casual audiences don’t think those consoles are for them.
By Joshua Dunn on Feb 28, 2010
Yeah… so I think that it should be noted that the term, “hardcore” gamer is a bit over used. Well, let them have that word. There is, however, then, a difference between hardcore gamers and, “real gamers”. “hardcore” gamers say everything sucks unless it has blood/is a shooter. “Real” gamers play everything and enjoy a wide variety of gaming, “flavors.”
“Hardcore” gamers will never enjoy the kinds of gaming that “real” gamers do, because their range of games is so limited. I imagine that most “hardcore” gamers dismiss the multitude of awesome and creative core Wii games for only two reasons:
Case 1: “Oh my god! The graphics are so lame, what a gay game!”
Are they really so shallow? Magic 8 ball says, unequivocally, “yes.”
Case 2: “The controller is so awful! Why couldn’t the make a normal controller, instead of forcing me to use this crap?!”
God forbid a company tries to make something new, and break from the mold, instead of just doing the same as has been for more than 20 years. Shame on them! lol
Oh… and yeah…. that “dumbed down version of Dead Space”, while good for an on rails game… yeah… does not compare to the original Dead Space. I was not happy when I heard that EA was making the Dead Space Wii game an on rails. That’s what happens when a company tries to appeal to the casual gamer and the real gamer at the same time. It alienates both.
By Anon on Feb 28, 2010
@Joshua Dunn
I agree, they also need to realize when they call themselves “hardcore” they really make themselves sound like gigantic faggots. The wii doesn’t have the best graphics, and the games are a different experience from the 360/PS3, but that’s what I like about the Wii, it’s different and innovative unlike the PS3 and 360 which are prettymuch glorified computers that can only play games and a few extra features.
By Axe99 on Mar 1, 2010
I’m a recent Wii owner, and have been terribly disappointed by it. I don’t need cutting-edge graphics (I still play PSOne games that I missed the first time around from time-to-time, and have played a few Virtual Console classics as well since getting the Wii), but I do expect the game design of Wii games to be up to par with the PS2 and, preferably, the PS3/360 (where technology allows, acknowledging that the Wii won’t be able to cope with the larger open worlds/more complex physics/larger range of animations).
However, after giving the Wii a red hot shake (Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime: Corruption, Zelda) I was left thoroughly disappointed. Zelda and Mario felt like a step back from PS2 design (seriously – compare the underlying game design of Jak and Daxter, the 2001 original, with the mid-1990s design of SMG. Sure, it’s got circular worlds, and the combat is solid PS2, but the refreshing lives, the way the game loads, the checkpoints – very _old_ school) – and Zelda feels just like Ocarina of Time. If I want to play a late 1990s game, I don’t want to be paying late 2000s coin for it. MP:Corruption was good (it actually was late PS2/early PS3 game design), but the asymmetric Wii control system meant I got a sore shoulder after playing for an hour – not an issue I have with MW2, MAG, IL-2, Dragon Age or any of the other top-notch interactive experiences, the likes of which the Wii has nothing which compares.
The Wii is great if you like Nintendo games, and don’t game for long periods of time (or don’t mind putting asymmetric pressure on your body – which ain’t good for you long-term), but for a gamer with broader and more modern tastes, for me it was a total waste of time. I tried _really_ hard to like it (and Lost Winds 1 and 2 are actually really good
), but overall, I can’t justify running it when there are far better interactive experiences available on my PS2 and PS3.
By Scott on Mar 1, 2010
I realize that I’m probably going to be attacked and disagreed with here, being on a Nintendo-devoted site. But I’m here because I like Nintendo too, so before you act like I’m some 360/PS3 fanboy, know that my Wii and DS get love too.
The problem that the “hardcore” gamers have with Wii isn’t that it has NO good games. It’s that it doesn’t have ENOUGH good games to satisfy the “hardcore” gamers’ frequency of play.
I’d say the Wii gets about 1 good, gamer’s game core title a month, on average. But I play an average of 1-2 new games per month. And there are a lot of genres I don’t like as much, like Sports, Music, and Platforming, which eliminates a LOT of those 1-per-month titles. There just aren’t enough quality games on the system to satisfy the amount of games I like to play.
The term “hardcore” that you are all hating on isn’t because core gamers think we are better or more badass. We say hardcore in that we play A TON, so much so that a good title every month or two isn’t enough to keep us busy & happy.
The issue here is that I would like to have a large selection of good games to choose from each month, instead of having to get the 1 big title that came out. Look at Metacritics 2009 numbers for some stats to back this up: Wii had 11 titles averaging 85 or above, only 1 of those was above 90. Xbox 360 had 24 titles averaging 85 or above, and 7 of those were 90 or higher. The PS3 had a whopping 32 titles averaging 85 or above, with 10 of those scoring 90 or higher.
And no, those were not all shooters, as some people claimed here. There were various action games, fighting games, strategy games, racing games, platformers, sports, and tons of arcade/indie games in those lists. It’s about choice, and I have more to choose from on those systems.
By Sabaal on Mar 18, 2010
Axe99 and Scott, thank you for being sane, sensible people and providing meaningful arguments.
Axe99, I’m sorry you didn’t like the Big 3 as much as I did, but I’m a little confused about why. You’re comparing the designs with various time frames and consoles, implying (I assume) that newer designs are better, but in my experience, a well-designed game is timeless to begin with. As a game designer myself, I like to think I’ve been observant enough to get at least that much right. I also don’t quite get the “asymmetric pressure” thing; I never had a problem just setting the controller down and pointing it at the screen. Even the Metroid Prime Trilogy seldom requires much more than a flick of the wrist now and then. In fact, I find the independent freedom given to each hand actually makes relaxing easier.
Scott, I usually ignore Metacritic for these purposes, as I think it’s ridiculous to depend on statistics based on complex, non-numerical data such as personal opinion. In response to your own opinion, I’m afraid I don’t have much I can tell you, aside from “This year will be different.” I know you’ve probably heard that a lot, but I think it’s actually going to happen this time. There’s more kickass Wii titles coming out in the first half of the year than I’ll certainly have time for.