Looking back, was the Wii mote too ahead of its time?

[Kinitawowi]

The WiiMote's biggest problem is that it was exactly of its time. It caught on to the massive motion control fad - and hit it head on. As soon as the fad died the console lost every leg it had. Kinect is dying on its arse because it came in after the fad had long gone.

Ditto the Wii U tablet controller, of course - that ship had sailed before the console even existed.

 

[The Lunatic]

The wagglestick was awful.

It didn't make sense in a lot of games, beyond tennis.

Nobody really wanted to play games that didn't benefit from the input type with that input.

Entirely pointless, frankly frustrating to use. Very much a gimmick.

 

[Foolery]

I'm inclined to say no. It was clunky, imprecise, and added nothing that a conventional controller couldn't do.

 

[Quadocky]

I think the thing in that jumps out at me is that the idea of the Wiimote and motion control was ahead of its time. However in practice its just a cumbersome way of doing the same things we have always done in games. Instead of using a joystick for balance and precision, we use a giant air joystick with the ability to yaw for balance and precision. I have yet to see "Motion controls done right" outside of Nintendo Land (Plays to the strength of movement and builds focus around that rather than tacking it on in a game otherwise better suited for standard joysticks)

THAT being said, however... I would note that the design of the wiimote controller itself is a lot more approachable for most unaware consumers. And that, honestly its a lot more fun to watch people PLAY the Wii for some reason. The Swinging of the controller and the visual action on screen creates a sort of performance art that cannot be replicated with normal controllers.

 

[Nimcha]

Nope. I agree with Yathzee circa 2006: "They represent a dead end."

 

[gorfias]

How is it less immersive? Thinking something and then having it magically happen isn't at all immersive. Sorcery for PS Move was certainly the most immersed I've ever been in any magic game. It's an incredible feeling to perform a gesture and have a specific spell erupt from your wand because of it.

Metroid Prime 3 is another example. Not only is it faster and more fluid than using a regular controller, it's far more immersive. It's all about implementation.

Scrumpmonkey said it pretty well and helps explain why I didn't like playing Madworld. I'm waggling a stick around rather than simply pressing a button that should do the same thing.

I do wonder how I explain my liking it so much for party games. I think it helped me interact with others in a way that, say, a 4 person multiplayer with normal controls would not.

 

[ultrabiome]

As someone who actually used it in more than a few games, I have these thoughts:

Nintendo, the media, and even reviewers overestimated the precision that the standard wii-mote could provide (although made much better with the motion+ tech). Nintendo could do amazing things with their new wii-mote, but they also realized it's limitations and played to its strengths, while 3rd parties struggled to successfully transition their expected capabilities to programming the wii-mote (i.e. how to recoginize an 'action'). 3rd parties often tried to do too much with the motion tech, making it hard to reliably execute even basic motions. It seems the best use generally was minimal - nothing too complex or complicated motions.

This generally didn't apply when the wii-mote was used as a pointer, as the programming around moving a cursor on a screen isn't really 'new' to video games. Metroid Prime 3, the Conduit, Goldeneye 007...

A games that I remember using the motion tech well:
Star Wars the Force Unleashed - used the motion tech for many of the force powers, including the nunchuck. Generally responsive and frankly, it was empowering to actually 'force push' stormtroopers, and of course, swing the lightsabers horizontally or vertically.

 

[Vivi22]

I think the main reason the Wii didn't get too much real third party support was due to developers not knowing the strengths and weaknesses of this new control scheme.

The main reason it didn't get much third party support was because the hardcore crowd abandoned the system, and nothing but half-assed casual titles could sell, and even that was hit and miss because the casual crowd that really ate up the Wii in large numbers didn't spend money on games. The Wii had far and away the worst software attach rate last generation because these were people who were satisfied with nothing but Wii Sports and Wii Fit.

And the Wiimote wasn't ahead of it's time. Largely because motion controls don't really have a future that hasn't already been fairly thoroughly explored. It's an awful control idea that will always be hobbled by an unnecessary amount of energy expenditure, and complete lack of any meaningful haptic feedback. Until motion controls can at least get past the latter problem, they're not only not ahead of their time, they're actually underdeveloped. The problem isn't that no one knew how to use the stuff properly. It's that once developers got their hands on it they quickly realized that the tech isn't even close to where it needs to be to be a viable replacement for traditional controls.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't think "Immersion" means what you think it does.

In the gaming community, "immersion" means "whatever I feel like doesn't fit with the game." Mechanics are bad? Breaks my immersion. Not 60 FPS? Breaks my immersion. Texture pop-in? Breaks my immersion. Can't murder children? Yeah, people said it. Breaks immersion.

There's a reason "MY IMMERSION" has become a mocking point of intent.

However, I would argue that any time you have to fight the controls, it lessens the experience. Call that immersion or call it a heffalump, but it's an issue. And it's more an issue with motion controls.

Though it does look like you're on board with that. Still.

 

[Lightknight]

No, the Wiimote was just a first iteration of a new technology that hadn't been implemented in gaming before.

To call every first iteration of new technologies "before their time" just because they aren't perfect would be ridiculous. Things get better over time.

 

[themistermanguy]

I think the thing in that jumps out at me is that the idea of the Wiimote and motion control was ahead of its time. However in practice its just a cumbersome way of doing the same things we have always done in games. Instead of using a joystick for balance and precision, we use a giant air joystick with the ability to yaw for balance and precision. I have yet to see "Motion controls done right" outside of Nintendo Land (Plays to the strength of movement and builds focus around that rather than tacking it on in a game otherwise better suited for standard joysticks)

THAT being said, however... I would note that the design of the wiimote controller itself is a lot more approachable for most unaware consumers. And that, honestly its a lot more fun to watch people PLAY the Wii for some reason. The Swinging of the controller and the visual action on screen creates a sort of performance art that cannot be replicated with normal controllers.

I like how half the people in this topic who insist that motion controls are broken have probably ony played like 1 or 2 games.

 

[Roxas1359]

I like how half the people in this topic who insist that motion controls are broken have probably ony played like 1 or 2 games.

You do know that assuming things you don't know is generally a bad thing right? How nice of you to assume that just because people say the controls were not good means they've obviously only played 1 or 2 games. Thing is, if the controls worked properly from the start, Nintendo would have never even needed to make the Wii Motion Plus attachment at all. Motion controls, when compared to button inputs, will be less precise than use a controller. The amount of times the Wii note didn't register things in Skywatd Sword was annoying, and that game came out at the tail end of the Wii's life. As a pointer and for rail shooters, the motion controls are fine. For other games, they weren't the best choice of option. Why do you think more games started having the Wiimote not being the only controller option? Hell, Sonic Colors controls awkwardly with the Wiimote and Nunchuck, as does Mario Kart Wii, but with GameCube or Classic/Pro Controllers they are a lot easier.

 

[Rednog]

I think the thing in that jumps out at me is that the idea of the Wiimote and motion control was ahead of its time. However in practice its just a cumbersome way of doing the same things we have always done in games. Instead of using a joystick for balance and precision, we use a giant air joystick with the ability to yaw for balance and precision. I have yet to see "Motion controls done right" outside of Nintendo Land (Plays to the strength of movement and builds focus around that rather than tacking it on in a game otherwise better suited for standard joysticks)

THAT being said, however... I would note that the design of the wiimote controller itself is a lot more approachable for most unaware consumers. And that, honestly its a lot more fun to watch people PLAY the Wii for some reason. The Swinging of the controller and the visual action on screen creates a sort of performance art that cannot be replicated with normal controllers.

I like how half the people in this topic who insist that motion controls are broken have probably ony played like 1 or 2 games.

So that's your retort to people's arguments against motion controls? They don't know what their talking about because they probably only played 1 or 2 games? Seriously? You could have just shortened your argument to "lol scrubs get good".

If something doesn't work how many attempts do you have to make until one can have a valid point? If something is an utter mess the first few times you try it out there's no reason for you to believe that the next time it is going to work perfectly.
It's like owning a car that causes you to spin-out 3 out of the 4 times you use it. Just because it works perfectly the 4th time and you had an amazing experience that 4th time, you wouldn't call it a good experience overall, nor should you argue that it is a good car.

 

[Rad Party God]

Skipping most of the comments, because I can predict how this will turn out to be, I'm throwing my two cents on the matter.

The Wiimote was garbage.

With that to boot, I also think that the Wiimote STILL has a lot of potential, especially with the WiiU, but not the vanilla controller, the Motion Plus is what still has a lot of potential.

Metroid Prime Trilogy is, for me, absolutely the best example on how can a First Person perspective game can be highly improved with the Wiimote, though that game used mostly the IR pointer.

Also Okami proved that a game that was basically meant to be played in a slow pace, can be significantly improved upon and even speed up the gameplay a notch or two, though that's another IR pointer heavy game, the accelerometer motions kinda sucked (try to succesfully use the dodge motion twice in a row).

And Resident Evil 4 was much easier with the Wiimote configuration.

BUT there's also Mario Kart Wii and other gimmicky games that couldn't use the accelerometer properly. To me, it's not a matter that the technology sucked, but that as you said, devs didn't know how to implement them most of the time.

Motion Plus improved upon this a lot and I still think it has a lot of potential, but I absolutely agree that not all games are meant for motion controls, just look at Donkey Kong Country Returns, it was an absolute pain in the ass to play with the "NES" style of the Wiimote and the Nunchuck configuration didn't make matter any easier.

I'm glad they decided to implement a more traditional controller configuration (Classic Pro, GameCube controller, etc.), because not every game benefits from the motion controls as Ninty wanted.

 

[themistermanguy]

Skipping most of the comments, because I can predict how this will turn out to be, I'm throwing my two cents on the matter.

The Wiimote was garbage.

It wasn't garbage if it could do its job right, which in several games, it did. The blame doesn't go to the Wiimote (although it has its limits), the blame goes to the developers.

BUT there's also [b}Mario Kart Wii[/b] and other gimmicky games that couldn't use the accelerometer properly. To me, it's not a matter that the technology sucked, but that as you said, devs didn't know how to implement them most of the time.

Actually, Mario Kart Wii's Controls were fine.

I'm glad they decided to implement a more traditional controller configuration (Classic Pro, GameCube controller, etc.), because not every game benefits from the motion controls as Ninty wanted.

True, not every genre benifits from it, however, somethings work better with the Wiimote than any other option.

 

[Snotnarok]

No, it wasn't ahead of it's time.
There were few games that worked better with that than a regular controller....which was the problem.
They also were pretty demanding on the system because each controller had a infrared camera built into it to read the sensor bar. Which is where the Wii got a lot of it's mockery from, it had to use a chunk of system resources to read the controllers.
The biggest thing that shows they weren't ahead of their time was, the Wii to this day still has the most controller options by default than any other system and because of their policies or whatever was also the most limiting. Use Wii remote for this game, use remote and nunchuck for this one, they never let you pick from the list of controllers the Wii actually was able to use. I'd have loved to be able to use that classic controller for a bunch of games but NOPE, Nintendo deemed it worthless and you must use what they want.

There were a lot of people claiming the controller was great for shooters, to them I say they're crazy. So hard to aim, aiming at the edge of the screen to turn just never worked to turn- only for you to go too far and get a "aim at the screen message". Bloody worthless. :|

 

[zerragonoss]

The wii mote was awesome the having the left and right half of the controller be semi independent made for a lot more sitting options, and often better posture. Wait their was motion controls? Ah those were all right liked, them for meteoroid and mario party, that's about it kinda clunky.

 

[RedDeadFred]

It sold a lot did it not? How could it possibly be considered ahead of its time? If something is incredibly popular, that means that it was exactly the time for that thing.

 

[themistermanguy]

No, it wasn't ahead of it's time.
There were few games that worked better with that than a regular controller....which was the problem.
They also were pretty demanding on the system because each controller had a infrared camera built into it to read the sensor bar. Which is where the Wii got a lot of it's mockery from, it had to use a chunk of system resources to read the controllers.
The biggest thing that shows they weren't ahead of their time was, the Wii to this day still has the most controller options by default than any other system and because of their policies or whatever was also the most limiting. Use Wii remote for this game, use remote and nunchuck for this one, they never let you pick from the list of controllers the Wii actually was able to use. I'd have loved to be able to use that classic controller for a bunch of games but NOPE, Nintendo deemed it worthless and you must use what they want.

There were a lot of people claiming the controller was great for shooters, to them I say they're crazy. So hard to aim, aiming at the edge of the screen to turn just never worked to turn- only for you to go too far and get a "aim at the screen message". Bloody worthless. :|

There are a lot of Wii games that do offer classic controller support