Electronic Entertainment Expo 2013 (E3)

[Skummy]

I just think they're an arbitrary way to try and extend gameplay time - if the story's good enough, or the gameplay's good enough, you should want to play it through to the end anyway. I'd rather keep playing because I'm enjoying it, or because I want to know what happens next, not because that's the only way I'm going to get the gold trophy for being 75% done.

Achievements are fine, but it's the way they're used that pisses me off. They can be fun, by rewarding skill, or little funny things - like the crab one in Tomb Raider, or some of the amazing ones in the Lego games ("One Does Not Simply..." for walking into Mordor in Lego Lord Of The Rings, or the superb "Solid Snape" in Lego Harry Potter) - but too often, they just seem fairly un-necessary, by "rewarding" you for reaching arbitrary checkpoints that you need to go through, or they're the sort of thing TKz is talking about - collect 1000 of this, or play for X number of hours - that reward blind persistence over actual skill.

I feel like your point about not many games on it falls apart though Skummy when the Wii U has been out for almost a year and still hasn't got any games on it.

Which is fine as a standalone criticism of the console, but people are using it as a negative when comparing it to the PS4 and the X-Box One, neither of which have any games available, by virtue of not having been released yet. It's just a fairly nonsensical argument.

I don't think the launch titles for PS4 are that strong anyway - usual mix of sports titles, glorified tech demo racing games, party games (you know, those things that people hated the Wii for), and only a couple of genuinely solid titles; Diablo 3 (also coming to PS3 and 360), Assassin's Creed IV (also coming to WiiU, 360, PS3 and XB1), Watch Dogs (also coming to WiiU, 360, PS3 and XB1), LEGO Marvel Super Heroes (also on the rest, and most likely WiiU will get the strongest version), plus a whole bunch of interchangeable wartime shooters - which I guess go over well with the target demographic, still, somehow.

I'm curious about Knack, admittedly, if only because I'm not sure what it really is.

The "launch window" stuff is a little more interesting in places, but then, "launch windows" are a bullshit concept anyway, designed to make it look like you've got more products available than you do - the PS4 "launch window" runs to March 1st, and I'd put money on half the "launch window" titles getting delayed. Only, when it happens to PS4, it'll be the individual developers that get the blame whereas, when games for the WiiU get delayed, the internet response is invariably "lol, nintendo".

[TKz]

I don't mind the grindy ones if there's a reason to do that grind. In Ni no Kuni, one of trophies is for collecting 2,000 glims (little health orbs that pop up during battles), another for using alchemy to create 250 items. The problem with that second one, compared to the first, is that the first is something you'll do if you do all the side quests, spend time fighting enemies to try and catch new creatures and so on. The second one, you'll never need all of those 250 items. There's absolutely no reason to create 250 (Just to clarify, I'm not 100% that's the actual number, but still) unique items when half of them you won't need. It should be things to encourage exploring more of the game, not a way of padding extra hours in.

Similar, collect all collectibles can be fine... if there's a point. There's a big difference between find 100 feathers and find these 10 hidden notes that'll fill you in some of the lore of the world and further explain parts of the story.

It's actually why I'm concerned about games like FF7 getting trophies added. I can see them skipping the sensible ones like "Collect every Materia" and trading it for "Master every Materia"... why the fuck would I ever need to master some of them? If it's not going to be something I might choose to do without the added incentive of a trophy, it shouldn't be a trophy.

[Benji]

I just think they're an arbitrary way to try and extend gameplay time - if the story's good enough, or the gameplay's good enough, you should want to play it through to the end anyway. I'd rather keep playing because I'm enjoying it, or because I want to know what happens next, not because that's the only way I'm going to get the gold trophy for being 75% done.

Which is all well and good, but I often get distracted by a new game, and don't end up finishing the older one in time. With achievements, I tend to go back at a later date and complete it.

[deli]

To quote Charlie Brooker on Twitter;

The PS4's nauseating "social" features look set to transform gaming into a ninny's Facebook account with a joystick glued to the front.

This argument is so fucking irritating. It's optional, you can turn it off completely, and you can do it for all the other consoles as well. But of course, me wanting to socialize with friends makes me some fucking prole from 1984. I love Charlie Brooker, but he's wrong on this point.

[Skummy]

It's got nothing to do with "surveillance" or "1984", it's do with Sony giving a "we're all about games!" pitch and giving us anything but, and about all the major companies latching awkwardly on to a trend in gaming that they don't fully understand.

[apsham]

It's a feature that people are GOING to use. Have you been on Facebook? Well the Facebook of a person that would use those kinds of things? Every site these days has a million like this, share this, etc. buttons it seems. It seems like a relatively tiny, tiny thing.

[Summers]

To quote Charlie Brooker on Twitter;

The PS4's nauseating "social" features look set to transform gaming into a ninny's Facebook account with a joystick glued to the front.

This argument is so fucking irritating. It's optional, you can turn it off completely, and you can do it for all the other consoles as well. But of course, me wanting to socialize with friends makes me some fucking prole from 1984. I love Charlie Brooker, but he's wrong on this point.

Kinda like people whining about Kinect always listening when it can be deactivated..

[TCO]

To quote Charlie Brooker on Twitter;

The PS4's nauseating "social" features look set to transform gaming into a ninny's Facebook account with a joystick glued to the front.

This argument is so fucking irritating. It's optional, you can turn it off completely, and you can do it for all the other consoles as well. But of course, me wanting to socialize with friends makes me some fucking prole from 1984. I love Charlie Brooker, but he's wrong on this point.

Kinda like people whining about Kinect always listening when it can be deactivated..

Except it still always has to be connected no matter what's deactivated. That's not a feature you can turn off, that's a restriction by making a previously peripheral accessory, necessary.

If the social thing is done right it could be amazing, if it's done wrong it'll be shit beyond belief. Anyway if it's shit it'll just disappear and we'll all forget about it like Playstation Home.

[TKz]

We don't talk about Playstation Home, TCO.

[King Ellis]

Home was a prime location for trolling.

[Cactus Drags]

I just think they're an arbitrary way to try and extend gameplay time - if the story's good enough, or the gameplay's good enough, you should want to play it through to the end anyway. I'd rather keep playing because I'm enjoying it, or because I want to know what happens next, not because that's the only way I'm going to get the gold trophy for being 75% done.

Achievements are fine, but it's the way they're used that pisses me off. They can be fun, by rewarding skill, or little funny things - like the crab one in Tomb Raider, or some of the amazing ones in the Lego games ("One Does Not Simply..." for walking into Mordor in Lego Lord Of The Rings, or the superb "Solid Snape" in Lego Harry Potter) - but too often, they just seem fairly un-necessary, by "rewarding" you for reaching arbitrary checkpoints that you need to go through, or they're the sort of thing TKz is talking about - collect 1000 of this, or play for X number of hours - that reward blind persistence over actual skill.

I feel like your point about not many games on it falls apart though Skummy when the Wii U has been out for almost a year and still hasn't got any games on it.

Which is fine as a standalone criticism of the console, but people are using it as a negative when comparing it to the PS4 and the X-Box One, neither of which have any games available, by virtue of not having been released yet. It's just a fairly nonsensical argument.

I don't think the launch titles for PS4 are that strong anyway - usual mix of sports titles, glorified tech demo racing games, party games (you know, those things that people hated the Wii for), and only a couple of genuinely solid titles; Diablo 3 (also coming to PS3 and 360), Assassin's Creed IV (also coming to WiiU, 360, PS3 and XB1), Watch Dogs (also coming to WiiU, 360, PS3 and XB1), LEGO Marvel Super Heroes (also on the rest, and most likely WiiU will get the strongest version), plus a whole bunch of interchangeable wartime shooters - which I guess go over well with the target demographic, still, somehow.

I'm curious about Knack, admittedly, if only because I'm not sure what it really is.

The "launch window" stuff is a little more interesting in places, but then, "launch windows" are a bullshit concept anyway, designed to make it look like you've got more products available than you do - the PS4 "launch window" runs to March 1st, and I'd put money on half the "launch window" titles getting delayed. Only, when it happens to PS4, it'll be the individual developers that get the blame whereas, when games for the WiiU get delayed, the internet response is invariably "lol, nintendo".

...what? How on earth do you figure that?

I honestly want to play Zombii U, it looks amazing, has great reviews etc. etc. but there's nothing else, barring Monster Hunter, that I can't get anywhere else. All that seems to be announced are new Mario/Mario Kart and new Zelda and Smash Bros and jesus fuck have we not gone down this exact same path enough times already?

Also I hate the tablet controller. Just cannot get on with it at all. Nice idea, but I just don't find it comfortable to use.

[Skummy]

I really like the tablet controller - didn't expect to, but I love it. I find it really comfortable to use, and more often than not the games that feature it heavily don't make it feel clunky or tacked on like motion controls so often did.

As for WiiU getting the strongest version of Marvel Superheroes, I've just generally found that the Lego games have been more enjoyable on the Wii, I just think their whole style lends themselves better to a Nintendo console. And I expect that, off the back of Lego City Undercover, the WiiU will probably get a few tablet-focused exclusive features.

I don't really see the problem with Nintendo announcing new Zelda, new Mario, new Mario Kart, new Smash Bros etc.; what's the difference between that and PS4 and X-Box One rolling out new interchangeable versions of Call Of Duty and whatever other shooty-shooty games people are playing these days? That's their bread and butter, basically, and if they're consistently good, then no harm done.

But in terms of interesting games still to be released for WiiU...new Pikmin looks fantastic, Wonderful 101 looks set to be one of the more interesting games released in a long time, HD remake of Castle Of Illusion is the stuff that dreams are made of, new Oddworld, new Bayonetta, plus a reasonably strong list of multi-platform games.

On top of that, I'm not sold on Rayman Legends after being disappointed by the last one, but it seems to be getting good press, and Disney Infinity has potential to be a lot more fun than the concept requires.

[zero]

Super Mario 3D World, Smash Bros, the eventual Zeldas and Metroids of the world... you own a Nintendo console for Nintendo games. And those are the games that stand the test of time. Perhaps I'm just nostalgic for Nintendo at the moment because I just bought a 3DS, but I realize I like these games much, much more than most of what's being put out there today from the other guys.

And to Skummy's point, let's not forget that Sony is notorious for weak launch lineups, Microsoft isn't much better either. There weren't many must-own games in the first six months of the PS3 and 360.

[TCO]

I've said it when I saw it first and still feel the same now that I've tried it, the Wii U controller is fucking stupid. Nintendo just aren't very good at making consoles anymore and they'll never have the best 3rd party games and if do they'll be watered down versions with their gimmick of the generation attached.

Even classics like Mario Galaxy would've been better if I didn't have to wave my wrist about to make him spin for no reason other than "Yay, motion controls!"

It won't ever happen but I wish Nintendo would go 3rd party so I could buy their great games without buying their lower spec, shovelware-laden, gimmicked consoles

[zero]

I like the tablet controller... I don't see what everyone's issue is with it. It's surprisingly light and comfortable and the ability to play on the tablet screen is pretty damn slick. I know Sony's gonna do that with Vita, but that's a steep cost to go along with the PS4. And lol, Smartglass.

I get the gripes about Nintendo's lack of third party support, which was certainly justified with the Wii because it couldn't do HD... but I don't get why developers aren't supporting the WiiU. Especially since most of the big titles launching on PS4 and XBO will also be on PS3 and 360.

[Benji]

I can tell I'm going to hate this new generation. The current gen seemed to see console fans getting along, barring a few friendly jabs, but this last E3 has just made people into a bunch of 13 year olds who have to bicker about the smallest of things (and no, I'm not discounting myself from that)

[apsham]

That has little to do with what the generation is going to be like though, this happened - I'm sure - back when the PS3 and 360 were going through the trade shows.

[Skummy]

Fair enough if you're just not a fan of the tablet controller after using it, though personally, that wasn't my experience at all. I went in with doubts, but found it far more intuitive than I ever imagined it would be.

Being able to play on just the tablet screen is something that needs to be promoted more, in my opinion, as it's a fantastic feature - being able to play on the tablet because someone else is using the TV is a godsend sometimes, and my girlfriend often plays games on the tablet late at night or early in the morning so as not to risk waking me by turning the TV on. Little things like that - how the console actually becomes part of your daily life - are a far bigger deal to me than processing power, or anything that Microsoft or Sony are trying to sell their consoles on.

I also don't really see how "Nintendo don't know how to make consoles any more" is a valid criticism, when the Wii outsold the PS3 and X-Box 360 by more than 20%.

I honestly think that Nintendo get a bad wrap through being an identifiable brand, with a solid identity. When something goes wrong with a game, when something's delayed or not as good as expected, even if it's a third-party product, the response is "lol, nintendo". No one blames Microsoft when third-party games are delayed for the X-Box, no one is blaming Sony for the next Fallout game not being out for the PS3 yet - they blame the people who were actually responsible. But not enough games out on time for the WiiU? Well, that's all Nintendo's fault! I'd like to see how many of the "launch window" titles for X-Box One and PS4 are delayed in comparison to how many for the WiiU.

I can tell I'm going to hate this new generation. The current gen seemed to see console fans getting along, barring a few friendly jabs, but this last E3 has just made people into a bunch of 13 year olds who have to bicker about the smallest of things (and no, I'm not discounting myself from that)

It's like the last days of Sony vs. Nintendo. It stops being about objective quality issues, and becomes more and more about brand loyalty, and about potshots fired across both brands. You only need to look at Sony's "we don't do all that stuff!" strategy at E3 to see that they're more concerned with differentiating themselves from Microsoft than they are with giving you a solid reason to buy their product, because they believe (wrongly, in my opinion) that people will inevitably buy one or the other.

I think we're seeing the last days of home consoles as we know them.

It won't ever happen but I wish Nintendo would go 3rd party so I could buy their great games without buying their lower spec, shovelware-laden, gimmicked consoles

And again, "shovelware" is a complaint against the Wii and WiiU that I just don't understand at all. Every console ever has had shit, cheaply made games - why is it only with the Wii that it's been seen as an indictment of the console as a whole? Yes, there are bad games available for it - you just don't buy the shit ones. No one's slagging off the PS3 as a whole for having "Just Dance" available for it, for fuck's sake.

[TCO]

The Wii has a reputation for havingore shovelware because the motion controls were a license for companies to make shit games, tack on gimmicky controls and sell them. The same can be said about lazy ports of good PS3/360 games, that are utter shite on the Wii with sloppy controls to boot.

The fact that the Wii outsold the PS3 and 360 is not a justification of it being a better console, better marketed yes, by a mile. I know countless people who bought into the controls and were hugely disappointed, only to sell it on soon after.

If you just have a Wii U, you're going to miss out on all the big 3rd party games, that's a good a reason as any to avoid it like the plague for me. A tablet controller and a new Mario game with silly controls isn't enough reason for to me to choose it

[Sousa]

The Wii has a reputation for havingore shovelware because the motion controls were a license for companies to make shit games, tack on gimmicky controls and sell them. The same can be said about lazy ports of good PS3/360 games, that are utter shite on the Wii with sloppy controls to boot.

I think what Skummy is saying is that people hang Wii's shovelware around its neck like an albatross, shake their fists, and scream "NINTENDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" but, just to give an example, shitty PS3 games (the Family Guy licensed games, Harry Potter nonsense, Squad-Based Shooter #573 But This One's Not By A Major Company So Nobody Pays Attention) aren't seen as an indictment of the console. Why is Shitty Carnival Games Compilation 3 an indictment of the Wii but Rapala Fishing Frenzy 2009 isn't an indictment of the PS3?