GDC: "The Wii is a piece of sh*t," says Hecker

[spenser.d]

Well, I certainly can't view Definition 6 as a serious art, er, gaming company, with the clearly unprofessional manner that Hecker carries himself. If I were at that meeting, I would've walked out. Not because he's downing the Wii, but because he can't seem to convey his message without retorting to persistent swearing.

Let me get this straight. You would have walked out of the Burning Mad: Game Publishers Rant session because of a rant?

The guy is entitled to his opinion, right? I don't think the Wii is as serious as any of the others, but that's not a bad thing either. I also still think the Wii is a gimmick, but that's also not really a bad thing. And for any of you looking to avoid his games, you probably won't have to worry, as I'm sure his games aren't coming out on the Wii.

-Spenser

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

Wow, way to rant like a 13 year old on a forum.

[Mathachew Veteran]

Let me get this straight. You would have walked out of the Burning Mad: Game Publishers Rant session because of a rant?

The guy is entitled to his opinion, right? I don't think the Wii is as serious as any of the others, but that's not a bad thing either. I also still think the Wii is a gimmick, but that's also not really a bad thing. And for any of you looking to avoid his games, you probably won't have to worry, as I'm sure his games aren't coming out on the Wii.

-Spenser

Guess I should have realized it was a rant session, wooops! :p Well I guess I can take that comment back, or I can't, er... whatever.

It had nothing to do with what his opinion was, whether he was praising or downing the Wii, but what he was saying, but as you pointed out, it was a rant session so it's likely that I wouldn't have been there at all :p

[spenser.d]

Guess I should have realized it was a rant session, wooops! :p Well I guess I can take that comment back, or I can't, er... whatever.

It had nothing to do with what his opinion was, whether he was praising or downing the Wii, but what he was saying, but as you pointed out, it was a rant session so it's likely that I wouldn't have been there at all :p

Heh, yeah the part about it being his opinion wasn't really directed at you, just the first part of my post :p

-Spenser

[nid~vaeda]

Of course noone actually seems to have read what he says.

He is in fact not complaining about the Wii graphics,he is, and rigthfully so, complaingin that the Wii CPU is too weak to be used for more advanced stuff. innovative and reolutionary games isn't abotu swigning yoru control around the room, that's just a different way to control the game, it doesn't make the game more revolutionary.

Meanwhile the Multicore 360 CPU and the Cell cpu with it's children are able to do some rather awesome numbercrunching, and being multicore they can do it at the same time, (the 360 does 2 threads per CPU active at the same time, letting it handle 6 threads simultaniusly)

Take a game like Assasins creed. The wii, even if your educed the graphics to something the wii could handle, doesn't have anywhere near enough power to crunch the numbers for the AI this game needs and uses to be what it is. Games that rely heavily on physics will also need to be scaled back or drop the physics compeltely on the Wii.

Basically ebcause of the crippled CPU, the Wii is crippled a lot in what it can do. But hey you get to swing the controller around the room to "fun" games with low end graphics, that'll be fun for a while.

If this is so then why can Wii Sports' Physics engine rival that of the Havok Physics engine?(Read that somewhere) I mean I understand what you are saying but I think you are cutting the Wii short like I said earlier it has alot of power for what it has under the hood. Developers have been working on less intensive physics engines that deliver the same effects has the ones that need super CPUs.

[Glassed Silver]

if everyone loves the Wii, what makes it a bad console then?

the fact its underpowered?

well the kind of games you usually played and still play with nintendo machines arent the most CPU hungry ones anyways...

if nintendo managed to have a low-power machine but still come out with this unique mass market way to control your character, i think thats pretty cool.

personally i'd still rather get a 360 than a wii, but the wii isn't a bad console for sure :rolleyes:

Glassed Silver:mac

[Danrarbc]

but games are just too cartoony and too unrealistic for my taste.

It's a Nintendo console.

That and it's been out 4 months.

[PiracyX]

I’m proberly going to get flamed for this but here goes....

There are people who agree and disagree and that doesnt make anyone wrong but I think Hecker is right to an extent. I don't agree with all of what he is saying and personally he is a complete moron but the Wii isn’t all that. I brought my Wii console a week ago with Zelda:TP after thinking about it for along time only to take it back to my Game store that afternoon. I thought the console was joke to be honest. Ok it’s not about the graphics but come on; it’s barely more powerful than a xbox 1 and the fact that there aren’t many good games coming on it. I think the only game that scored 9/10 was Zelda so far and it wasn’t that good. I thought Wii Sports was alright but grew tired of it after only two hours. I was extremely disappointed as it was something I wanted for a long time and I did have many chances to get one earlier but all I could think about where was the games coming from?

I don’t agree with this guy ok, just he is right to a opinion, Nintendo are abit of a joke as they haven’t thought about how long this console will last and with its weak processor there will be no doubt they’ll have a new version with upgraded hardware just to annoy early adopters that they made a mistake but that’s just a guess. How is this console going to last 4-5years as it is?

If anything the console is expensive for what you get. If Nintendo’s focus was purely on gaming then they could have at least made support for HD but instead they shot themselves in the foot.

[Mathachew Veteran]

I’m proberly going to get flamed for this but here goes....

There are people who agree and disagree and that doesnt make anyone wrong but I think Hecker is right to an extent. I don't agree with all of what he is saying and personally he is a complete moron but the Wii isn’t all that. I brought my Wii console a week ago with Zelda:TP after thinking about it for along time only to take it back to my Game store that afternoon. I thought the console was joke to be honest. Ok it’s not about the graphics but come on; it’s barely more powerful than a xbox 1 and the fact that there aren’t many good games coming on it. I think the only game that scored 9/10 was Zelda so far and it wasn’t that good. I thought Wii Sports was alright but grew tired of it after only two hours. I was extremely disappointed as it was something I wanted for a long time and I did have many chances to get one earlier but all I could think about where was the games coming from?

I don’t agree with this guy ok, just he is right to a opinion, Nintendo are abit of a joke as they haven’t thought about how long this console will last and with its weak processor there will be no doubt they’ll have a new version with upgraded hardware just to annoy early adopters that they made a mistake but that’s just a guess. How is this console going to last 4-5years as it is?

If anything the console is expensive for what you get. If Nintendo’s focus was purely on gaming then they could have at least made support for HD but instead they shot themselves in the foot.

So you played the Wii for a few hours, two of which went to Wii Sports and based on, say, two hours of Twilight Princess and you say it wasn't that good of a game? Did you know that TP takes 30 - 40 hours to beat? There's so much more that goes on in the minuscule amount of time you gave it... (That time frame is based on what I've seen others say; I haven't beaten it yet, but am 20+ hours into it and I'm taking my time). You gave it part of a day, not a few days...

Anywho, this isn't about TP, but the Wii in general.

You said yourself that it's not about the graphics, but then compared it to being no more powerful than an X-Box; that nullified the beginning of your statement. I'm not flaming or bashing you, just pointing out that you're saying it's not about "this", but then are making a comparison of what you said it's not about.

Nintendo's focus was on gaming, which does not equate to power. All companies want as many people as possible to play their systems, so Nintendo make it easy for anyone to do it. Try getting my wife, father-in-law, sisters-in-law, pastor, brothers, etc. to play a PS3 or 360. Won't happen. But with the Wii, it's a very likely possibility, which was the point of the Wii. So you didn't like it, that's fine. Maybe it's too simple for you, but not for the majority of other people who can say it's so easy to use and play.

I think I'm done... I'm just reiterating what many people have already said and:)ill continue to say. I doubt you'll be convinced :)

[Danrarbc]

I?m proberly going to get flamed for this but here goes....

Of course you are you bought one game and played it for a couple hours.

[spenser.d]

Of course you are you bought one game and played it for a couple hours.

He gave it a try and didn't like it, how can he possibly be in the wrong. Just because it doesn't suit his tastes doesn't make him a bad person.

At least he gave it a try, which is a lot more than I can say, and I still gave my 2 cents in this thread.

-Spenser

[PiracyX]

So you played the Wii for a few hours, two of which went to Wii Sports and based on, say, two hours of Twilight Princess and you say it wasn't that good of a game? Did you know that TP takes 30 - 40 hours to beat? There's so much more that goes on in the minuscule amount of time you gave it... (That time frame is based on what I've seen others say; I haven't beaten it yet, but am 20+ hours into it and I'm taking my time). You gave it part of a day, not a few days...

Anywho, this isn't about TP, but the Wii in general.

You said yourself that it's not about the graphics, but then compared it to being no more powerful than an X-Box; that nullified the beginning of your statement. I'm not flaming or bashing you, just pointing out that you're saying it's not about "this", but then are making a comparison of what you said it's not about.

Nintendo's focus was on gaming, which does not equate to power. All companies want as many people as possible to play their systems, so Nintendo make it easy for anyone to do it. Try getting my wife, father-in-law, sisters-in-law, pastor, brothers, etc. to play a PS3 or 360. Won't happen. But with the Wii, it's a very likely possibility, which was the point of the Wii. So you didn't like it, that's fine. Maybe it's too simple for you, but not for the majority of other people who can say it's so easy to use and play.

I think I'm done... I'm just reiterating what many people have already said and will continue to say. I doubt you'll be convinced :)

Hey i didnt intend to bash any Nintendo guys here, just my opinion on the system since i played it. I actually brought the console at 9.15am in the morning and played it all the way through from 9:30am until 4:30pm in the afternoon, which in that time i played Zelda for about 5 hours and the rest on WiiSports and i just didnt like it. When i returned it the guy was a little surprised that it came back but i said i didnt like it and he was fine, however i walked out of the store very disappointed in the end.

Of course you are you bought one game and played it for a couple hours.

I could only afford one game with the console and since reading all the reviews about on the internet, TP was the only one worth getting and even that didnt live up to the hype i expected. I know people love it and thats great :)

[soniqstylz]

The fact is, he's only saying all this to make a name for himself in the industry, and it's clearly working, because everyone's talking about him now.

The guy is an editor for a magazine and sits on the advisory board for the GDC.

Apparently, he already has a name in the industry.

And, if you all would read, he blasted the PS3 and 360 last year, so it's not like he's just picking on the Wii.

[HawkMan]

If this is so then why can Wii Sports' Physics engine rival that of the Havok Physics engine?(Read that somewhere) I mean I understand what you are saying but I think you are cutting the Wii short like I said earlier it has alot of power for what it has under the hood. Developers have been working on less intensive physics engines that deliver the same effects has the ones that need super CPUs.

hmm while I don't necessary want to say that the Wii sports physics engine isn't good. I doubt it has anywhere near the power and extensability of Havok. It's a fair bit easier to write a specialized physics engine doing only the few relatively simple thigns the Wii sports engine would need to do. there's also a rather big difference between simulating a full high detailed enviroment , say a Room, with different materials for the carpeting, the walls the roof, full of stuff like cloths, tables, chairs... and have them all act accordingle dependign on wehter they slide or fall on carpet or wooden floor and so on. and a Wii sports engines that say in Tennis has to handle a single plane for the ground, a simple net, the ball (wich can use a simple sphere objedct for the physics instead of relyign on an actual mesh object, same with the ground) and the rackets. in fact the only item in this situation that requires heavy physicas calculation oustide of what physics engines has been doign for years is the net, the res use simpel physics primites like planes and spheres.

And again you're talkign abotu just phytsics in a simple game. I was comparing to *Assasins creed, there you have phsyics in an enviroment full of different materials and objects, then you have the AI. and you have to drive the actual game engine alogn with that, and we haven't even touched the graphics yet, and still the Wii wouldn't be able to run it. now we haven't even gotten to Crysis wich pretty much requires one core alone for the Physics and one for the AI.

The point is that because of it's lackluster power, the Wii can't be used for games that even though they don't necessarily use heavy graphics, Are a new generation of Games that needs extreme number crunching for AI's, Physics, and a whole lot of other thigns that aren't even related to the graphics.

As for the graphics. Think of BioWares Mass Effect, a game with cinematic graphics, heavily nonlinear story, animation and character on a detail level that's just plain scary to watch, and an experience that switches between game and cut scenes seamlessly while looking like damn good CGI movie (maybe not quite Final Fantasy yet, but then Final Fantasy was viewed in DVD resolution too. so it's not that far of really). Game experiences like that can't be had on the Wii. and while I expect that MAss effect will be a damn good game just by the story and gameplay alone, The Graphics does make a difference, the high quality cinematic graphics does make the game better. there's nosure it would be a great game with pixels that have 2 different sprites for facial animation and all the dialogue was text based. But it wouldn't be the awesoem next gen game Mass Effect hopefull and probably will be.

[SixFootJockey]

hmm while I don't necessary want to say that the Wii sports physics engine isn't good. I doubt it has anywhere near the power and extensability of Havok. It's a fair bit easier...

(cut to save room)

I totally agree with your statement that the Wii cannot handle overly complex AI and physics engines simultaneously, but you should really get your head out of the hole there! Games do not need to have uber-realistic physics or AI to be fun, entertaining, or challenging.

Lets have a look at a couple of noteworthy games... Do the Final Fantasy series or Legend of Zelda series have complex AI and physics engines? Sure, they do have them, but they aren't complex and don't require a large amount of resources. What about the Super Mario series? Tetris? Pong? Doom? GoldenEye 007? The list goes on...

The only games which absolutely require a realistic physics engine are simulations such as Gran Turismo, Flight Simulator, and Live for Speed.

As for the graphics. Think of BioWares Mass Effect, a game with cinematic graphics, heavily nonlinear story, animation and character on a detail level that's just plain scary to watch, and an experience that switches between game and cut scenes seamlessly while looking like damn good CGI movie (maybe not quite Final Fantasy yet, but then Final Fantasy was viewed in DVD resolution too. so it's not that far of really).

You do know the difference between pre-rendering, and real-time rendering, don't you?

Edited March 8, 2007 by matt_hobbs05

[neufuse Veteran]

Sounds like a guy that is ****ed he didn't decide to develop for the console people want to play...

[Boffa Jones Veteran]

Thought this was an interesting article. It would be sad if nintendo didn't take games as an art form.

Edited March 9, 2007 by Boffa Jones

[Mike]

i've always seen nintendo as the more "fun" games aimed at younger people and not the serious gamers

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

the CPU is way below todays standards, but the Wii still rocks (Y) i hear a lot of good things about it, but he is right in one aspect.. the system should of been more powerful.. but then price goes up.

i like the Wii the way it is

[ATLien_0]

Yes the Wii is underpowered and graphics suck, i mean cod3 on it looks like it running on my computer at all graphics down. BUT Nintendo systems have always been about fun and less about the newest graphic technologies

[Boffa Jones Veteran]

It bothers me that nintendo invites that view though. Metroid was an amazing game that was far from aimed towards kids. The sense of exploring a new world was definitely there. The resident evil games for the console were also amazing. Then you look at games like eternal darkness and the star wars rogue squadron games. If you want to tell me those are games aimed at younger people I would disagree.

The problem is that the top guys at Nintendo seem to be letting that perception stick and it will not do them good in the long run.

[acies]

Where you been, the moon?

I dunno have I?? I seriously haven't seen anything about it out selling both sony and mircosoft.

But that's great (Y) , I have yet to play the Wii, but it looks like great fun, as well as being the nicest looking console.

[Lasker]

I just saw the Chris Hecker website and in reality he is an idiot, look at this piece of crap game: http://www.d6.com/games/index.htm hehehe, that's the kind of quality he looking for. Who would have ever thought such a retard would developed this piece of **** :rofl:

and this is his direct page: http://www.d6.com/users/checker/

[spenser.d]

I totally agree with your statement that the Wii cannot handle overly complex AI and physics engines simultaneously, but you should really get your head out of the hole there! Games do not need to have uber-realistic physics or AI to be fun, entertaining, or challenging.

Lets have a look at a couple of noteworthy games... Do the Final Fantasy series or Legend of Zelda series have complex AI and physics engines? Sure, they do have them, but they aren't complex and don't require a large amount of resources. What about the Super Mario series? Tetris? Pong? Doom? GoldenEye 007? The list goes on...

The only games which absolutely require a realistic physics engine are simulations such as Gran Turismo, Flight Simulator, and Live for Speed.

You do know the difference between pre-rendering, and real-time rendering, don't you?

I think the point he was trying to make is that we'd much rather like to be able to have the kind of fun the Wii provides now, but also have it be able to handle games like Mass Effect so that you don't have to buy another console just to have fun with those games.

-Spenser

[nid~vaeda]

I think the point he was trying to make is that we'd much rather like to be able to have the kind of fun the Wii provides now, but also have it be able to handle games like Mass Effect so that you don't have to buy another console just to have fun with those games.

-Spenser

Ultimatly isnt that where consoles fail at? They each have exclusive games and features that you need the console to experience...so unless all the companies decide to pull together to create a super console we will have to have multiple consoles to experience it all...that would be cool though :)