Sleeping on Castlevania

My revived enthusiasm for Nintendo console gaming was mostly sparked by the introduction of the Nintendo DS. Before then I had played my GameCube and GameBoy Advance SP and enjoyed them, but it was nothing to write home about. Even when the Nintendo DS was launched, I was more intertested in playing through Super Mario 64 than anything else (I had missed the original console iteration while in college).

After the release of Nintendogs, however, I saw a great potential for innovative gameplay using the touch screen and microphone. Though I had by that time played touch screen and microphone driven games on different platforms, Nintendogs represented the first time I had ever seen such fun, intuitive gameplay introduced so cleverly. Nintendo followed this success with more exciting and challenging games that began to redefine the way people perceive portable games.

Infatuated with the possibilities of unique control schemes, I decided to forego purchasing Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow on its release date for Trauma Center: Under the Knife since Trauma Center is played entirely with the touch screen. On the other hand, Castlevania is a franchise, and I didn’t see any foresee innovation coming out of the the new portable release despite the overwhelmingly postive reviews from multiple trusted gaming outlets. I just thought that Trauma Center was a much better game to display the capabilities of the system.

Almost on a whim, I recently traded several games that I no longer play on Game Trading Zone for Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow and another title. I didn’t expect to enjoy it much because I’m not much for side scrolling action/adventure, and moreover the Castlevania games are notorious for starting to feel “cheap” in the platforming area of difficultly (i.e., jump from this tiny platform to the next and the next while avoiding the swooping Medusa heads). Maybe in part because of my low expecations I was totally floored by how much fun the game is.

Though I don’t have much to add beyond what the multiple glowing reviews revealed, I will say this: to those of you who thought New Super Mario Bros. is the best game available for the DS, think again. This game is longer, more engaging, more diverse, and (for the most part) less frustrating than NSMB. Moreover, I can count the number of games I’ve completed twice in my life on one hand, and this is one of them (though perhaps this doesn’t count because my second playthrough was decidedly different from the first, being a new unlockable mode and all).

I slept on this first Castlevania release for the DS, but I certainly won’t make the same mistake with the forthcoming Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin. And if you own a DS and haven’t given this title a shot, make sure to pick up a copy before it gets rare. You’ll be glad you did.

FPS Control

Nintendo Wii Fanboy recently offered up this post: The FPS Conundrum.

Seasoned first person shooter veterans are hoping for a new, vastly improved way to aim on the Wii. However, the two FPS titles on display at E3, Red Steel and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption (or MP3 Corruption because it’s more fun to say) exhibited the same general aiming mechanic which differs greatly from existing FPS controls. Aiming inside a “focus rectangle” does not cause the camera to shift; aiming outside it does. Put simply, the aiming reticle does not stay centered onscreen while aiming.

People who have only read about this and not tried it seem to think this scheme is likely to alienate more people than it wins over, that it should control more like every other FPS. Most who have tried it (including yours truly) seem to have acclimated quickly.

I won’t argue the superiority of the Wii FPS paradigm-in-progress, but I can say that a centered reticle would not work for Wii. On a PC, when you take your hand off the mouse, the aim is static. On a console, when you take your thumb off the right analog stick, the aim is static. You do not take your hand off the Wii controller, so static aim is fairly difficult for those of us that aren’t licensed surgeons. Some readers have suggested pressing buttons to look instead of using a focus rectangle or tilting the controller to turn while aiming light-gun style, and all I can say after thinking through their ideas is, “Thank goodness those people aren’t developers.”

Still, is there a better way to do it, or is this as good as it gets?

Why Gaming Media Doesn’t Know What to Make of Wii

Nintendo’s own Reggie Fils-Aime (as in FEE-EM) stated in an interview in the July issue of Nintendo Power that Wii is supposed to please Nintendo’s loyal core gamer fan base while offering something new, intuitive, and simple for non-gamers. Ostensibly, this means that Wii’s unique control scheme should promote depth of control for seasoned gamers as well as ease of control for those who are intimidated by current generation control schemes. As Nintendo is very focused on expanding the gaming population, the marketing influence has been on the latter.

Just about all the major online and print video game media houses have written at least a little about Wii, and most have written quite a lot. Though the overall response does appear to be positive, Wii has still been criticized for perceived lag in control, FPS aiming versus turning, and lack of a noticeable jump in graphics over the GameCube among other things. No doubt these are all issues that concern the gaming population at large. However, if Nintendo is to achieve its intended jump in market share, aren’t these accolades and criticisms falling mostly on the wrong audience? When was the last time your parents picked up a copy of Electronic Gaming Monthly or read a post at IGN or GameSpot?

Members of the gaming press are by and large hardcore gamers (why else would they want the job?). Moreover, they cater to hardcore gamers. The entire rating system that pervades modern gaming assumes at least to some extent that the reader is familiar with gaming and will have similar expectations. Yet, if Nintendo has their way, many people will either be touching video games for the first time since the 80’s arcade heyday or for the first time period. And these people won’t be reading gaming magazines — at least not initially. They’ll be reading what non-gamers read. Time. Newsweek. The Wall Street Journal. Playboy.

Being in a class of your own has its benefits. The new market can play Wii Sports: Tennis without comparing it to Virtua Tennis. Journalists for mainstream publications can write a piece on a released game without giving it a rating. People with little or no experience with gaming at all can speak about their experiences with Wii in a way that keeps other non-gamers’ eyes from glazing over. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

For the Wii to be a true breakout success, Nintendo needs more press coverage in mainstream publications and news media. Like Geico or monster.com, everyone needs to know what the Wii is even if they don’t own one. Advertising for Wii needs to step far beyond the realms of gamer-centered web and print. As much focus should be put on getting a Wii in the hands of Walt Mossberg as Dan Hsu’s.

Much of the gaming media does a very competent job of reporting the Wii as many gamers will see it. However, when it comes to expanding the installed user base of console gaming, the gaming press doesn’t know what to make of the Wii because they are standing on the wrong side of the fence. Nintendo well-wishers should keep that in mind the next time someone writes a scathing criticism of Nintendo’s next-generation (or as Nintendo puts it, “new generation”) strategy. If Nintendo’s success is the concern, take a look at the source and guess how many people will read it. Then ask, “Do they really matter?”

Should Miyamoto-ism Come to an End?

This article explores the stifling effect that the “Shigeru Miyamoto way” of designing games is having on Nintendo’s future strategies. It is provided without comment.

The Image Problem

The following quote was lifted from an article that I read in a very respectable publication:

Most video games aren’t violent or racy. A recent survey from the Progress and Freedom Foundation, a free-market think tank, found that more than 80% of the top-selling titles for the past five years came with the video-game industry’s “Everyone” or “Teen” ratings, meaning that parents can assume reasonably inoffensive game content. About 15% of 2005’s games received “Mature” or “Adults Only” ratings–surprisingly few, given that 65% of gamers are 18- to 34-year-olds.

I also noted that Sony’s busted PR machine is still spouting the “Nintendo is for kids” mantra. The unspoken bases for this accusation are 1) the number of M and AO rated games for Nintendo’s consoles is low, and 2) the number of rated E games that have reasonably inoffensive content are higher for Nintendo’s consoles.

Most of the mainstream game detritus that hits the shelves these days is deplorable not so much because of gratuitous violence and kiddie-porn sexuality but because of the total lack of imagination. How many different ways are there to relive World War 2 or swing a sword at a wave after wave of enemies while you work steadily toward a record-breaking combo? Hey, is that a huge gun protruding from the bottom right corner of your screen, or are you just happy to see me? Quick, follow the elf girl in the thong! That isn’t to say that any game that fits these descriptions is necessarily bad, but the problem is that this kind of content appeals to the relatively small group of people who play console games now. I feel that in large part we are dominated by young, single boys who are excited by gratuitous violence and Wal*Mart-approved sexuality. To be frank, however, these gamers deserve to have their needs catered to. What bothers me is the “dominated” part.

As long as console gaming is mostly confined the “sweaty hands” segment, graphics, guns, and girls will be king. It is therefore the responsibility of console manufacturers and game studios who object to this lopsided demographic to innovate in gaming ideas so that the market does not continue to grow stagnant. When there are more people who play console games that aren’t just after the three G’s, it will be more beneficial for gaming studios to bridge the cross-section with games that have wider appeal. This movement is already starting to take off in Japan, as games that concentrate on graphic violence and sexuality in arcades seem to be rapidly approaching niche market status with the explosion of rhythm-based and “highly interactive” upright games. Only, Japan has its own image problem — the sexual divide is much more pronounced, and it becomes difficult to design a game that is cute and friendly enough for women while not being emasculating for men.

Does Nintendo have an image problem? I would say so, but only in the minds of hardcore console gamers. As long as family-friendly means cute and saccharin-sweet, the people most likely to play family friendly console games are the people least likely to have the money to spend on them. However, a lot of progress has been made with the Nintendo DS in this regard. The most recent attempt at breaking their “for kids” image is the Touch Generations branding; meant to appeal to people who wouldn’t ordinarily consider themselves gamers, Touch Generations games are the epitome of non-threatening, easy-to-learn play mechanics. But easy to learn play mechanics alone won’t bring the non-gamers in droves. The problem is more complex; people who’ve never played video games need a reason to start, and those that haven’t played video games for ages need a real reason to come back to the fold.

Rather than increasing the output of (barely) teen- and mature-themed games, Nintendo seeks to correct its image problem by outnumbering the nay-sayers. Get enough people playing Tetris and Brain Age and it won’t matter as much what the Grand Theft Auto fans say. This approach may be viewed with skepticism by the gaming press, but the gaming press is mostly composed of hardcore gamers. If it weren’t, who would write about games? Now, whether or not this approach will work remains to be seen, but Nintendo has managed to generate an unprecedented amount of buzz for the Wii from surprisingly little information. I personally know people whose current generation consoles have long since fallen into disuse that are eagerly looking forward to playing the Wii.

The only real danger to Nintendo’s approach is that they already stand to lose some of the hardcore gaming crowd with the Wii’s gaming approach. If they are unsuccessful in growing the market, the image problem will worsen rather than improve. Of course all of us here are hoping that doesn’t happen. We will vote on Wii’s success with our dollars. However, chances are that it’s not about us, but about those people who watch us do brain training with curious interest. Nintendo’s loyal fan base is sizable, but that alone isn’t enough to rule the roost.

If Wii and DS succeed, there will be no image problem because Nintendo will offer a unique experience to many gamers who have little interest in other consoles. And with the lion’s share of the new gaming demographic, what use is there in fighting over a comparatively small hardcore audience?