Topic: Gameplay vs Graphics

[idolminds]

Article

Not sure if "gameplay" is the right term here...but I'll use it.

Its a preview for Marvel Ultimate Alliance, which will be on 360, PS3, and Wii. Check this out.

Obviously, the Wii version controlled quite a bit differently than its Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 counterparts. Every move could be executed by motion control using the Wii remote. What was interesting, however, is that the remote actually gave the player increased control over his team than what was offered in the other versions of the game. For example, instead of having to rely on a combination of button presses to execute an uppercut move, Wii users will simply need to flick the controller upwards. To slam an enemy you only need to flick the controller downwards. Leg sweeps, punches, and other moves are all pulled off easily and intuitively with the Wii remote.

Another big bonus that comes from the Wii’s unique control scheme is the ability to control the camera without having to take your thumb off of your attack buttons. While the PS3 and 360 versions use the right thumb stick to control the camera, Wii users only need to tilt the nunchuck attachment to the left or right to get the camera to rotate. While it’s a minor thing in theory, it’s a pretty nice perk that you’ll grow attached to rather quickly.

Vs

Graphically, the PlayStation 3 version looked the best of the three and sported some interesting distortion and blur effects that were absent from the Xbox 360 and Wii versions. Powerful attacks on the PS3 caused ripples of invisible energy to distort the area around the attack momentarily. When asked why this was absent from the 360 version, a developer told us that it was due to the PS3’s ability to handle shaders differently than what can be done on the 360 or Wii. Both the 360 and PS3 versions made use of impressive lighting techniques, particle effects, hi-res textures, and impressive character models while the Wii looks to be a mild step up from the current-gen efforts; though that is certainly to be expected at this point. Also, the PlayStation 3 version of the game was shown running in 1080p, which looked absolutely incredible and sharp while the Xbox 360 was running at a respectable 720p and the Wii version running at 480p. All three versions supported 16:9 widescreen modes.

-snip-

One wouldn’t expect the Wii version to hold up graphically against either the 360 or PS3 version, but when it was running in 16:9 widescreen with 480p it looked respectable. Wii users are simply going to have to accept that the perks are found in the gameplay and innovative use of the Wii remote rather than in graphical flair. Just don’t make the mistake of staring at a game in 720p or 1080p right before moving to 480p; the difference really is staggering.

So, as a conclusion:

At this point it seems that the PlayStation 3 will probably emerge as the preferred version for those that want the best in graphics while others may be drawn to the online support found on the 360. The Wii version is impressive in its own right, but it lacks the graphical flair of the PS3 or 360 versions; but it definitely has an edge in the gameplay department. Much like the customizable aspects of the game, you’re going to have to make your final decision based on your personal style and taste.

So what do you make of all this? Which one would you prefer? The HD res and graphical flair of the PS3, or the not as pretty but has awesome controls of the Wii?

[Pugnate]

The eternal question. And is with all questions regarding a choice between two extremes, the answer is always to find a balance.

[Quemaqua]

I think it would depend on just how fun the Wii version was in comparison.  The more I think about it, the more fun that one sounds.  I could totally see the fluidity of that kind of control style being awesome for a beat-em-up.  So yeah, I think that would matter a lot more to me than ripple effects and higher resolutions.  The more I game, the more I discover that while graphics are important, it isn't necessarily the *best* graphics that are important.  You just have to have good art direction, decent execution, and an overall graphical package that looks good, even if other things look better.  Once you have that, the better gameplay is going to win, even if one game looks a little better.  So when you're talking about an otherwise identical game... yeah, I'm going for the superior control method over which one looks better.

[Pugnate]

I am also wondering how tired my wrist will be after a Wii marathon. You could say it is the same as using a mouse, but it isn't really.

[iPPi]

We will know soon enough.

[idolminds]

I read the article and the first thing I thought was: I want to try the Wii version.

[Cobra951]

Graphics need to be good enough.  I think we're just about there already.  Unless I'm going to be projecting my games across a living-room wall, I won't get a lot of benefit out of 1080p as opposed to 480p.  So the answer is clear to me in this example.  That's not to say that I'm going to like the big departure in controller design on the Wii.  I don't know that yet.  And the extra computing power of the PS3 may provide a clear edge in gameplay where an intense variety of events happen simultaneously.  Each case is different.

[idolminds]

I agree with you there, cobra. Processing power is great if its used for gameplay. Its a shame that for the most part, that power is used for graphics.

[gpw11]

There's a video out there somewhere of this on wii and you can see a lot of the controller motions.  It looks pretty cool, but at the same time it kind of got me thinking:  sometimes I just want to fucking sit there and play a game rather then put a whole lot of work into it.  It's not really a lazyness thing, but sometimes it just seems like it'd be as much of a bitch as acting out a movie as you watch it.

[Quemaqua]

I think that argument is really, really lame.  The movements I've seen people do while using the wiimote are like super minimal.  I can't even imagine that tiring you out unless you have some kind of medical condition that makes you a super-pussy.

[Pugnate]

Like someone said, time will tell. But imagine moving your wrist sideways without a place for your arm to rest (You have to point it) for a few hours. Again, only time will tell how tiring it is after you come back from work after a long day infront of the computer or behind the steering wheel.

[Quemaqua]

I don't think that flies either.  Hold a standard controller.  Do you actually play with it in your lap?  I don't.  I hold it up.  I think people just think that they rest their arms, when it reality they hold the controller up and maybe use their legs or chair armrests to prop their arms.  I don't think that's going to be a factor with the wiimote.

[Pugnate]

I hope not.

[gpw11]

I think that argument is really, really lame.  The movements I've seen people do while using the wiimote are like super minimal.  I can't even imagine that tiring you out unless you have some kind of medical condition that makes you a super-pussy.

You misunderstood me.  I'm not saying I'm worried about it being physically tiring in the least, rather I'm worried about it becoming just plain tedious.  If you look at the video of the Ultimate Alliance game, the guy is doing the same 5 gestures over and over again as it only recognizes five gestures and the buttons you push modify the moves.  Swipe, swirl, slash, lift....repeat over and over again for like 20-30 hours.  I could see it getting mentally tiresome if anything.

I'm not saying the system is flawed in anyway, I'm just saying that it'd be nice for a lot of games like Ultimate Alliance to include the option for a more traditional control method.  Once moving the novelty of moving the controller around wears off it may become more of a downside to some of the games.

Actually, my main concern is that the new control scheme may kill some actual gameplay innovation.  Why spend money trying to find new gameplay mechanics when you can just remake the same old game but point the remote at the screen to move your character.    I'm sure nintendo and some developers will make awesome games with it, and that's why I'll buy it, but I expect they'll be more shovelware for it then for most consoles.

[Xessive]

Hmm, that makes me think of some of the controls in Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy). There were some scenrios (i.e. climbing) where you had to move the analogue sticks in certain motion to achieve the action, and it was pretty irritating.

Considering Nintendo is in charge here I have faith that they'll pull it off very nicely. They did a great job with the DS touch screen.

[Cobra951]

Whether I hold a controller up or rest my arms on my lap or chair arms depends entirely on the game and what I'm doing in it.  During heated sequences, yeah, that controller is higher up, and nothing restrains my arm movements.  But for sedate games or parts of games, my arms are resting on something, probably by the elbows.  I think you underestimate how physically tiring holding up even a light controller (or two) can become over the hours.  People can be in good physical shape, and still get to the point where their arms feel like they're going to drop off.  It's all about what muscle groups you use on a regular basis.

The short take:  I'm with Pug in his concern about long-term use of the Wii control devices.

[Quemaqua]

Again, you're probably resting by the elbows, which you should still be able to do with these controllers.  I've seen nothing to indicate otherwise.  Most of the movements in the videos I've watched haven't been so exaggerated that it you won't be able to do that.  *Shrug*

Gpw does raise an interesting point, though, and I can see what he's saying.  I suppose it's fully possible that people could shove out some crappy games like that just because they feel like the new control style will be innovative enough that their game doesn't have to be.