The Game Plan 06.08.07: Wii Shall (Not) Overcome, Part 2

Posted by James McGee on 06.08.2007

I call Nintendo out on some of its double-talk, and brace for the backlash

Last week, I began dissecting the major problems I see with Nintendo's Wii. I realize I'm treading on sacred ground for a lot of people, and I assure you this is not a topic I have taken up lightly, or with any real malice. I grew up with Nintendo, and have always had a soft-spot for the company. They are video games, so far as I am concerned, which just makes their current endeavor all the more disappointing. I hope I'm wrong, but I think Nintendo has made a huge mistake with the Wii. Leaning on the fad of motion-sensing controls and offering only a minimal power-upgrade from the Gamecube are just two of the decisions that, I believe, will come back to haunt Nintendo. Today, I'll wrap up this topic by examining the company's two-faced public image. I am James McGee, and here's The Game Plan.

The rest of my complaints about the Wii actually have more to do with Nintendo itself, and all fall under the broad topic of mixed messages. Nintendo keeps saying one thing and doing another, and gamers are going to start seeing through that attitude once the new-console smell wears off. We keep hearing two different things when it comes to the Wii's competitive nature, the age-group it's playing to, and its dedication to online gaming. If Nintendo really was all the things it claims to be, I would have no problem with the company. However, there's some inconsistency between words and action, and I think its time they were called out on their double-speak.

Nintendo and many of its fans would likely respond to some of my criticisms by saying "The Wii isn't trying to compete with Sony or Microsoft. That's why it isn't as powerful, and that's the reason for the innovative controls." Okay, fair enough. That would be a fair, viable strategy, considering how different the Wii is from the Playstation 3 and the Xbox 360. But riddle me this: if the Wii isn't trying to compete with the other two systems, why does it keep trying to compete with the other two systems? Why are there versions of Call of Duty and Marvel: Ultimate Alliance on the Wii—all with clunky, disappointing controls—in the first place? Yes, I realize that Nintendo is leading the charge with its quality games, and both titles I've mentioned are third-party. But game consoles aren't VCRs, where the manufacturer can't help it if a crappy movie finds its way into the machine. Nintendo has some say as to whether a game shows up on its system or not. If Nintendo insists on making motion-control the way to go, why not focus solely on innovative games that make sense with the Wiimote (and force third-parties to do the same)? "Oh, but Nintendo just wants to give its loyal fans a little variety," I hear you say. By offering sub-standard editions of current games and ports of one-to-two year-old games (Godfather, Resident Evil 4, Scarface) with a few wiggle controls added? Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. Either stick to your guns and be the innovative, revolutionary force you keep claiming to be, or stop promoting yourself as such. Would it be difficult to maintain that level of innovation? I'm sure it would. Would such a policy alienate some third-parties? Probably so, but if you're going to have the guts to take such a huge gamble on motion control, and the gall to act like you're the only company around doing anything worthwhile, then you should have the gumption to go all the way with it.

There's also the family-friendly mantra that Nintendo likes to lean on. Although a lot of critics have panned the company for being so kiddie oriented, I don't have a problem with it—in fact, I've praised them for it in the past. Seeing as how there are so few games that market towards kids and families, that gives Nintendo a built-in niche. Besides, like a good cartoon, just because a game is aimed at kids doesn't mean that adults can't enjoy it, too. I'd wager that Mario can still bring a smile to the face of even the most hardcore shooter fan. If the games are quality, then they will transcend age-groups.

However, when you start looking at things like Scarface, Godfather, Manhunt, and even rumors of Grand Theft Auto on the Wii, it once again seems like we're getting mixed messages. Sony and Microsoft both market themselves primarily to teens and adults, but they don't take a blatantly anti-kid/family stance, and so it's possible for them to offer a little something to everyone. But Nintendo places so much importance on its own clean, family-fun image that they come off looking like hypocrites offering some of the ultra-adult titles that have been and will be showing up on the Wii. Again, I understand how difficult it would be to offer nothing but "E" to "T" rated games, but if that is the image you want to promote, then promote it and stop with the double-speak.

Despite the Gamecube's broadband adapter and titles like Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Nintendo didn't seem to take much interest in online gaming (to be fair, neither did Sony; the Xbox was really the only console to put itself firmly behind the emerging trend). I'm sure there were people saying the same things about online gaming that I'm saying about the Wii now, so you can't really blame Nintendo for ignoring what very well could have been a fad. Today, the Wii has built-in wi-fi connectivity and a free online service, yet Nintendo's dedication to online gaming still seems questionable. Why even enable your console for online play if it's going to be relegated to a novelty? So you can kinda mostly surf the web, read the news, get the weather, and vote on whether you like cats or dogs? I already talked about this in my Death of Exclusives piece, but if you go online with your system, you already have internet. If you already have internet, you probably have a computer you use to surf the internet. If you surf the internet, you can accomplish everything on a PC you can do with the Wii's online environment, and that includes downloading the Virtual Console games for free. Are the emulated versions you find online legal? By and large, no. But the fact of the matter is they are easy to find, poorly regulated, and considering very few people have a conscience these days, there's nothing to entice gamers to pay for Nintendo's version of the games.

I understand that Nintendo's strategy with the Wii is to attract non-gamers, and the Wii interface might be more attractive to computer-phobics than a mouse and keyboard. But in trying to accommodate the general public, Nintendo runs the risk of alienating the core gaming audience. Online gaming isn't that important to me, so I don't have a problem with the Wii's limited online capabilities, but I feel like I'm in the minority among modern gamers. People want to play games online with their consoles, not vote on their favorite flavor of ice cream. Our old buddies Call of Duty 3 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance were released on all three systems, yet only featured online play on the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3. The first online-enabled Wii game will be Pokemon Battle Revolution, which hits store shelves in June. Microsoft and Sony had online-ready machines at launch, but it takes Nintendo eight months? Oh, and guess what company develops Pokemon games. Yup, Nintendo, which has a long-standing tradition of double-standards with third-party developers (a very brief, simplified, slightly one-sided version of which you can read here ). In yet another example of this behavior, Nintendo has yet to release the necessary coding to outside game developers to make their products online-ready for the Wii. What possible reason could Nintendo have for doing this? Honestly, I want to know, because it makes no sense, from a business standpoint, to alienate consumers and collaborators by offering a product that is identical to the same product released by a competitor, except for the fact that it seems like a cheap, dumbed-down knock-off.

What little online functionality the Wii offers seems like an afterthought. Honestly, it's a little insulting that gamers are supposed to be appeased by news and weather in place of actually playing games on a game console. If Nintendo still thinks online gaming is a fad, then stop pussy-footing around and just ignore it. That may be as hard as totally embracing the innovative, family-friendly image, but that's the bullet Nintendo needs to bite. Everything about the Wii is a huge risk, but if Nintendo would put itself firmly behind the gamble instead of hedging its bets, the Wii could be a long-lasting staple of gaming. They might have to settle for a smaller share of the market, but their legacy and reputation would remain intact.

One of my readers (in response to my "Think of the Children" column) commented that the Wii has done more to bridge the generation gap than just about any other gaming machine in history. I agree wholeheartedly, but the problem with trying to please everyone is that you eventually end up pleasing no one. Nintendo wants to appeal to the widest audience possible, which is a sound business strategy on the one hand, but the general public loses interest in fads pretty quickly, and if the core gaming audience has moved on to other things as well, the N will be in trouble. I keep hearing how Nintendo is the one with the guts to be bold and innovative—what I see is a company spreading itself so thin trying to capture every possible bit of the market that the product will eventually become diluted. They need to stop sending mixed messages, pick a consistent plan of attack, and follow through. Otherwise, they run the risk of losing all the ground the DS and initial Wii Fever have helped them gain.

For the record, I want to say again that I do not hate Nintendo. I would also like to say that I have actually played games on the Wii, and I'm not just haterizing with no perspective. The Wii seems to be really good at party games, which tend to lose their appeal if you don't have a group playing. I've actually had a lot of fun playing Wii Sports, Wii Play and Rayman Raving Rabbids, but it's the type of enjoyment I don't see myself getting into over an hours-long gaming session. I've seen Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess in action, and drooled accordingly, but considering I can play the same game—with roughly the same graphics and a traditional control scheme—on my Gamecube, I can't justify picking up an entirely new system. Still, I really, really hope the Wii proves me wrong and is able to outlast the charm of its gimmicky beginnings. If Nintendo converts me over the next few years, you'll be the first to know, and I will gladly, humbly admit my mistake. I am a Nintendo fan. I want to be a Wii fan. I hope, someday, I can be.

As I expected, I received a lot of feedback on this topic with differing viewpoints from my own. Contrary to what I expected, the whackos stayed home, and nearly every email I received was respectful, well thought-out, and offered interesting and compelling points. So, next week, I'll be taking the suggestion of one reader and posting some of the best arguments in the Wii's favor that I received. Tune in for the backlash.