Is Wii gameplay more important than Xbox, PS3 graphics?
This current generation of consoles has seen a split occur: that between focussing mainly on graphics (PS3 and Xbox 360) and focussing mainly on the gameplay experience (Wii). Does the success of the latter strategy mean that gameplay is definitely more important than graphics?
I like good looking graphics in a game as much as the next person. I still remember the first time I saw the intro movie on Gran Tursimo on the original Playstation. I was so impressed, I straight away reset the console so I could watch it again.
The same goes for in-game graphics, with games such as Gears of War and Assassins Creed drawing me in with their stunning graphics. The problem is, once you get over the beauty of how it all looks, if the gameplay is lacking, then you soon get bored and move on to something more stimulating.
As Steve Wysowski rightly points out on Xbox Focus, humans are naturally attracted to pretty things. But in the same way that the best looking person at a party may also be the dullest, the best looking game can also be lacking where it truly counts.
When we pick a partner, we tend to see past the exterior and make choices based on personality, sense of humour and shared interests. And with the success of the Wii, which was roundly criticised for its lack of power, it seems gamers are also learning to see past the obvious, and going for long term interest instead.
What’s interesting is that I would make an informed guess that most Wii owners aren’t actually that big in to games, or at least they weren’t until the Wii came out and got them interested. So maybe being blinded by graphics is a fault of hardcore gamers?
As a fan of retro games, I can safely say that gameplay is number one for me. Which is why I can happily play a PS1 or Dreamcast game to this day, and still get addicted enough to play through the night.
Sony and Microsoft seem intent on going down the graphically heavy route by making their consoles capable of almost lifelike graphics. But maybe they should learn from Nintendo and realise that gameplay will always emerge victorious when it comes to lasting appeal.
Related Posts:
22 Responses to “Is Wii gameplay more important than Xbox, PS3 graphics?”
Leave a Reply:
You must be logged in to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register today!
March 24th, 2008
LoL, I think it’s quite obvious to those who own a Wii, that yes, the gameplay is more important to them. Also, it could be that the Mario, or Zelda, or Metroid series are also still packing a huge following. Then again, there are many who feel that Halo, Gears, Mass Effect and Bioshock are more their cup of tea…and furthemore, there are still those who prefer GT, FF, MGS, Tekken etc.. as their slice o’ heaven.
Morne
March 24th, 2008
um ps3 games and 360 have gameplay and graphics the wii is just not even part of this current gen its last gen the ps2 is last gen the ps2 beat it so no
March 24th, 2008
Well just look at the DS vs. PSP. The gameplay of the DS vs. the pretty graphics on the PSP. It’s no contest what the majority of people prefer.
March 24th, 2008
IMO both are important, with gameplay edging out graphics/presentation. That being said the vast majority of Wii gameplay is horrendous so it’s a lose, lose for them.
March 24th, 2008
This is borderline idiotic. Who the hell ever said the PS3 and 360 focus mainly on graphics? Simply because graphics the PS3 and 360 can produce are vastly superior to the Wii’s, that means they mainly focus on them?
Sorry, but the 360 and PS3 have a shitload MORE of games with better gameplay than the Wii. There’s something just as important as console sales: software sales. If you ever look them up, you’ll notice that the 360 has DOUBLE the software attach rate than the Wii. How could that be!? I thought the Wii games have such superior gameplay!?
March 24th, 2008
i agree that gameplay is good, but i think nintendo screwd last gen, while many people may be buying it because is innovative, and cheap, i think it will burn out fast, i played nes, snes, n64, and game cube, and i think nintendo would sell titles only with mario, zelda and metroid, but that doesnt mean they are did the right thing with Wii, at least not for old gamers, if you talk about gameplay, and graphics, i would rather play with better graphics and old gameplay, because i dont like the wii gameplay at all.
March 24th, 2008
Wiidiots and DStards think that great gameplay is exclusive to their respective consoles. I own a DS and a PSP and both have great games and great gameplay. The reason the DS sells more isn’t because it has better games, it’s because it appeals to wider audiences with games like Brain Training and Nintendogs, but as a gamer I don’t really care about those two.
On the Wii versus PS360, that’s a pretty retarded argument. PS3 and 360 not only have superior graphics, they have superor gameplay: That’s what metacritic is for before claiming that, do some research before, you nincompoop.
The Wii isn’t selling because the casual gives a shit about gameplay, casuals care about brand and/or novelty. PS3 or 360 doesn’t mean Madden, since Wii does, so the casual can still pick up a Wii and play Madden. Since the Wii is a novelty too, and cheaper than the competition, then it’s a no brainer (for them).
Had casuals, new gamers, girls, women, middle aged gamers and grannies played games for the last 25 years, they would realize how lame is the Wii. Hell, I would love the Wii if it was the only thing I had ever played.
Wii is not a superior game experience to casuals and they don’t care if it is, they just care about having fun with family and friends, and looking dumb while playing is actually fun (to them).
Casuals don’t really need a storyline or shaders or gameplay innovations through software, it’s the fact that the Wii is the ONLY console in the market that makes it *seem* as if the game was actually mimicking your moves, even though you don’t really have to move your hands or arms much.
Nintendo is taking advantage of the LACK of knowledge and/or experience in games of people and exploiting it to make money by being lazy and not investing in R&D for hardware.
Microsoft and Sony are surely working on copying the Wii for the next-generation, and coming up with even newer things so that Nintendo doesn’t stand a chance anymore.
March 24th, 2008
@gabe c:
You are wrong.
The Wii is quite a bit more powerful than the PS2 (or XBox or GameCube).
It’s about 2.25x as powerful as a Gamecube (1.5x for CPU and 1.5x for GPU).
It’s nowhere near as powerful as a 360 (which is nowhere near the potential power of the PS3…not that any PS3 games have come close to using that potential).
But, most people don’t care. They just like to play games that are fun. They don’t need 1080p graphics to have fun.
March 24th, 2008
I’ll take gameplay over graphics as long as there are graphics and that they don’t look Atari games. Take a game like “No More Heroes”, it looks like shit even for Cell Shaded standards (Wind Waker and Jet Set Radio beat that game in graphic wise), but the gameplay is like no other and it will truly be remembered as one of the best 3rd party game for the Wii.
March 24th, 2008
“Nintendo is taking advantage of the LACK of knowledge and/or experience in games of people and exploiting it to make money by being lazy and not investing in R&D for hardware.”
Give me a break nVidia and ATI did all the R&D with regard to the PS3 and XBOX360s graphics, Sony and Microsoft just buy the chips.
“Microsoft and Sony are surely working on copying the Wii for the next-generation, and coming up with even newer things so that Nintendo doesn’t stand a chance anymore.”
Like Sonys lame EyeToy and the tacked on motion control of the PS3?
Sony and Microsoft don’t know how to innovate, both their machines are essentially the same as their first generation. It doesn’t take a whole lot of innovation to walk down to nVidia and say give me a super powerful GPU.
March 24th, 2008
This is entirely a straw man argument. The gameplay of one and only one nintendo game is really innovative, and that game is Wii sports. Otherwise, practically all the other very good/great games, theres only a handful, really didnt utilize the functionality of the key differentiator of the Wii from its competing systems, the Wiimote. Its a damn shame. Whats worse is that the longer that this persists and the Wii keeps selling out, the worse its effects will be on innovation within the industry. Nintendo and third party publishers need to start creating games from scratch around the Wii-mote and its not happening. Whats happening is that Nintendo and especially the other publishers are customizing the Wii-mote around existing franchises.
Also where is the wireless nunchuk? Wheres Wii-sports 2? Why the hell is Rock Band not going to have a DLC for the Wii? Instead, what do we have coming out, Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Mario Kart, games that without question are more suited for the PS3 or XBOX 360 type controllers. We also have Wii Fit coming out, but for Christ sakes do we really need more peripherals that wont have games developed for it?
March 24th, 2008
I’m sure it takes a whole lot of innovation to make gems like Kidz Sports.
March 24th, 2008
The wii is definitely exploiting the minds of people who don’t know much about games. Telling them that they have great games but can’t you count the amount of good games on the wii? They are being cheap and trying to take people back to the generation that gamers have ran away from. The PS3 and 360 have great gameplay so they focus on making games with great graphics as well, to make it as realistic and enjoyable as possible but the nintendo company is scared they will be crushed so they take people back to them. Games nowadays have great gameplay and good graphics for example Crysis, which is a computer killer but still plays well. So nintendo either moves to the next gen or stop blasting other companies like apple does to vista.
March 24th, 2008
Gameplay is more important than graphics. Period. Not that I wouldn’t prefer pretty games, but I would wade through some shit graphics if the gameplay was great while I wouldn’t touch a beautiful game with shit controls. Gameplay is everything, graphics are just icing.
March 24th, 2008
Both matter, I’ve seen/played games where graphics have made the game unplayable, and I’m not talking about low-res/misaligned textures but incredibly bland ones. Games where everything looks the same are hard to navigate. Also some games make poor design choices artistically which totally drain their appeal, regardless of whether they are running on a Gameboy or a PS3.
I’m sure every one of us has seen game breaking gameplay so I won’t go on about that.
March 24th, 2008
I suppose you prefer XBOX360 classics like Two Worlds and Bomberman: Act Zero.
The 360 has just as many crap games as the Wii, the difference is that even the good 360 games are just reheats of the old FPS formula.
As for the PS3 it hasn’t got any notable games yet, crap or good.
March 25th, 2008
As a father with a young son, I am happy that the Wii focuses on less violent games and on games that are easier to control. There are great games for every console, but the Wii truly shines as a family-friendly game player. That said, I will probably wind up also getting a PS3 to take advantage of the upscaling DVD capabilities and the Blu-Ray player. When comparing apples to oranges, I don’t think you can really get a consensus on which are better…
March 25th, 2008
The first day the wii came out i played it at my mates place and suffice to say the day after i was unpacking my wii. The good times lasted all but 1 month since then the wii onli comes out to play on some party nights. Gameplay wise, in what way does the wiis gameplay exceed that of the 360’s and ps3’s? How many AAA titles does the wii have compared to the PS3 and 360?and why is it that when you go to any reviews website such as ign, gamespy, gamestats etc that wii titles on average get about a 6-7 out of ten with a rare title getting above 8. Hmmm so much for the great gameplay argument. If the gameplay was so good i would be cranking out my wiimotes more often wouldn’t I. As for the PSP vs DS give me one DS Title that even holds a candle to GOD OF WAR CHAINS OF OLYMPUS.
March 25th, 2008
There’s nothing stopping PS3 or 360 from having games with good gameplay.
The CPU & GPU on the Wii are working very hard to make sure that Wii game graphics will always be on a lower standard than PS3 or 360 games.
Do you understand the difference?? In the 1st scenario, there are no limits to graphics & gameplay. In the 2nd scenario, the Wii can ONLY provide good gameplay. Because the system isn’t strong enough to produce graphics that are on par with today’s standards.
The Wii is one of those systems that will die a quick death. Nobody (for some strange reason) realizes that the Wii’s horrible CPU & GPU will become outdated very quickly. Therefore Nintendo will be forced to release their next system even earlier. The Wii owners will then be able to take their system out of the closet, and put it where it belongs. In the garbage.
March 26th, 2008
“Nobody (for some strange reason) realizes that the Wii’s horrible CPU & GPU will become outdated very quickly”
Like what happened to the PS2? Are they still selling more PS2s than PS3s?
May 8th, 2008
Brad wrote:
“…I am happy that the Wii focuses on less violent games and on games that are easier to control.”
Well Brad sure that’s good news for you but some of us which are actually hardcore gamers don’t want/need “games that are easier to control”. That’s less/poorer gameplay for us actually. There’s much fuss about Wii’s gameplay but gameplay is a totally different thing to different people. Some prefer it really hardcore and some prefer it so easy like watching a movie. What i really see in Wii for us hardcore gamers is:
1. Much smaller graphics capability than 360/ps3 – for some of us it matters for some of us like me it doesn’t.
2. A focus on “silly”/anime games like Mario. I don’t have anything with Mario but as you said it is limited to non violent games. We – the hardcore gamers – want Mario as much as we want to blow skulls away – we want a huge variety of available titles for our console. One day we play some anime platformer like Mario, next day some RPG game, next day some action game, etc etc.
May 8th, 2008
That been said i disagree with the article. Less graphics doesn’t mean better gameplay. I don’t know how people fall for that.
“As a fan of retro games, I can safely say that gameplay is number one for me. Which is why I can happily play a PS1 or Dreamcast game to this day, and still get addicted enough to play through the night.”
Wii has a analog controller which you control by moving your hand. Surely it has buttons also for all that “retro” games, but the fact that the analog thing is there by default, gives the developers the license to make games that play analog too. And that thing is something the simulation machines do. Surely it maybe “feels more natural” but retro/hardcore gamers don’t give a damn. They want to mash their keys in specific combos, with the right order, at the right time, simply cause they grew up like that and simply cause its way more accurate. That analog thing is “better gameplay”, only for the people that didn’t had a clue what games are about till Wii.