Unity To Enable Nintendo Wii Games

friggin awesome guys ; )

 

[right ear]<-*GRIN*->[/left ear]

 

/me does the dance of joy!!

 

Oh yeah!

 

In my best kid voice I'd like to shout out:


Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii !!!



8)

 

Well done, well done. Cheers!

 

Do you know if the games will be sold 'boxed' or will they be sold as a download through some type of Wii game channel?

I guess what I am wondering is, how would a small indie developer sell games for the Wii?

 

Special 1 week discount for Unity for this? Sorry, I wanted to buy a Unity Indie license today but 25% taxes, good God! That's 50 Euro more, I thought 200 Euro would be enough. Now I'll have to save up another month or go with Torque :x Damn! But maybe there will a special "Whohoo, Unity is going Wii!" limited time discount :roll:

 

Hey Unitors - Wonderful to see this news made official. Any luck on the Wii programmer?

Ok, my big question: If one were to develop a game completely in unity on say, a mac - would it then be a given that the same game would run on a Wii given the proper dev tools, etc?

It would be nice to know that I can work with an Indie license for now, until I have something that I feel is worth presenting to Nintendo with the knowledge that if I ever did port a dev kit I wouldn't have to do much (any?) work to get the thing to run on the Wii.

Also, do you guys have any idea what an equivalent hardware spec on the mac would be? This would help in knowing some basic limitations - i.e. if you wanted to keep your game at 60fps, what would your poly count limitations be, etc.

Thanks guys - and again - congrats. I can't wait to see the first Unity game up on the Wii Channel!

 

I assume there be improved Wiimote support in future versions?

 

Excellent news!
My project is perfectly suited to both the technology and the target demographic of the Nintendo Wii, so I am very excited.

Finally getting the time to get a prototype together after spending the last 6 months on game design and asset creation.

Again, wonderful news! Best of luck to OTEE and everyone on here!

 

so that means we will have official wiimote and nunchuck support in unity for prototyping soon? in the basic versions?
are you planning on implementing all the motion control recording stuff IN unity (with unity-style straight-forwardness), or is that something you will leave to the dev kit? (guess that's a naive question, as that's the big point of this announcement, right?)

 

@starmanta and sr: We don't have a full set of technical details to share publicly just yet, but suffice it to say that we'll have to offer improved controller support in Unity as part of allowing content development for the Wii platform.

 

Does this mean all versions of Unity will have controller support? I am currently using the DarwiineRemote hack, but I'd love to play around with something much more straightforward. This could really get the community to focus on this combonation as a legitimate Wii prototyping tool. If any particular prototype takes off, those developers could then approach Nintendo with a much more substantial application for their developer kit.

Congrats, BTW!

 

As I mentioned before, we don't have that sort of technical detail to share just yet, stay tuned for more details later.

 

Lets say I bought Unity now. Would a future upgrade for Unity that supports Wii games be free?

 

It says in the inital post in this thread that it'll be a separate license and you'll still need to get a Wii development kit through Nintendo.

-Jon

 

Hello,

What is the estimated delay for the next version of unity supporting the Wii platform ?

Regards,

Twin

 

Hi, I supose that this is a stupid question... but how can a developer buy a wii devkit?

 

Hrm...

How about a virtual office facility on a secure offsite server? I'll keep all the secrets there, promise. Either that, or padlocked toolshed in the woods. Or maybe a PO box and fax number at Kinkos? Work with me here...

 

I asked Joachim about this when they first announced they'll be porting Unity to the Wii, and he was pretty clear that you must have an actual office your employees go to. I guess this is to the discretion of Nintendo, and maybe it'll possibly change when WiiWare is "released".

 

No problem!

 

It seems like there may be some correlation between Nintendo's unwillingness to give typical indie developers development kits and ... oh ... I dunno ... the near total lack of non sucky Wii games.

I love the Wii, but frankly Wii Sports is still by far the best game available for it, and it's not that great.

 

I guess you haven't played Zelda or Mario Galaxy, right?

 

I'm joking of course; I understand that Ninty wants to protect their investments, filter out the riff-raff, whatever. I don't doubt that we'll see some great Unity content on the wii, which will be good for all of us. It irks my DIY sensibilities a bit, though. There's an underlying assumption that to make anything cool requires a team of specialized workers; can't be done by a single person, no matter how talented. Which we all know is wrong - how many employees did yoggy have when he made megapixel? Was he able to show "Financial Stability"? Tons of great stuff is created by individuals in garages and basements and bedrooms (cough); the internet is built on it. No need to ask permission to publish something, you just do it. I just did it and I want to do it again!

Consoles are important now, but longer term I think less so. The Net is the Platform.

 

HEY! Metroid, anyone?! I have not played the new one yet (asked for it for Xmas, and just got my Wii from Amazon), but Metroid Prime 1 is definitely a contender for best game of the past few years in my book. The new one is being praised as the best in the series, so I'm very excited about it.

Zack and Wiki is also fantastic, and Kororinpa: Marble Mania is the most realistic interfacing for a game I have ever experienced. It was just a bit too shallow, but still great fun while it lasted. The new Trauma Center has co-op play, so that could be great, and I imagine Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles and Ghost Squad are a blast (they're on my list of things to rent). The Twilight Princess and Mario Galaxy are both wonderful, of course.

Smash Bros. Brawl and the new Mario Kart are coming out within a few months, so at that point, the Wii will have the greatest games in the world, and they are guaranteed to not be cross-platform. I agree that the net will be the place to be, and I hate having consoles, because I loathe the clutter that hardware, wires, and a TV brings, but there's no way I can go without what the Wii is offering now.

 

I played Resident Evil on the Wii with my girlfriend, its fun, they successfully made it feel like a Res Evil game with the turning to look back and stuff even though it gets annoying sometimes.

Cant wait to get a Wii... so many good games.

Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Brawl, MMmm yum yum

Id love to make some games for the Wii... though Id imagine Nintendo will be on to another console by the time I can make console worthy games :<

CEH

 

And here's the best thing about the Wii. Its biggest downfall right now is that it has lower hardware capabilities than the other two, so third-parties are opting to just make crap and ports for it. But Nintendo is still making so much money that their next gen console will be able to have power AND that Nintendo charm. They couldn't put a lot of power into the Wii due to two bad-selling generations in a row, but this is the start of a turnaround for them.

 

I had this same thought, but because they are turning such a profit on the hardware itself, I'm not so sure of it. But I'm really hoping that you're right. Let's say they allow themselves to run at a loss and still charge $250 or $300 for the system. That could be an amazing product.

 

The reason the wii is underpowered is not because the gamecube and N64 weren't profittable enough - Nintendo chose to use last year's technology for their console quite deliberately. The reasons for this are numerous - to save money on hardware production costs, to save money on software development costs (simpler games are cheaper to make) and to be able to offer their console at a much lower price than their competitors, drawing people in with a novel control scheme instead of just HD versions of games they'd already played.

The fact of the matter is, Nintendo makes hardware for themselves, not for third parties. They didn't need cutting edge 3d graphics to make mario galaxy, zelda, or any of their other big sellers. More polygons or shaders or HD rendering wouldn't make their titles any more fun than they already are.

I would not expect nintendo's next console or handheld to be a technological powerhouse either. They've already proven to themselves and the industry at large that focusing on simpler, cheaper games with mainstream appeal is a much better way to make money, and I don't expect that will change. Their hardware will continue to advance no doubt, but it's much smarter to use last generation's tech after the price comes down, especially when being an early adopter doesn't really gain you anything.

 

Nintendo had said that if the Revolution, as it was called then, wasn't a success, then they were doomed. I'm going to find an exact quote on this. [EDIT! I got the Wii confused with the DS, sorry. See my next post.] They deliberately made something that would be at the lowest spec and highest related price that they believed the market would tolerate.

An Xbox 360 is $40 more than a Wii. People are paying more than a high-end PS3 costs to get a Wii, so Nintendo could certainly have made something that would work with cross-platform games (and I don't mean the PS2 games that are coming out for the Wii). If they had done that, they would be running the entire market right now. But the Wii was a gamble, and though they have struck gold with it, they didn't know it was going to happen. Next time around, they'll have the cash to operate at a loss on the hardware again, but I think that sales mentality may be dying anyway.

Because of Nintendo's relative success vs. the competition, and Microsoft's success over Sony, I think the next generation of systems will all be cheap and similarly-powered, like they always were in the past.

 

Hmm...considering how well they do with handhelds, I kinda doubt that. Maybe they would have exited the console market though.

--Eric

 

I think it's way too early to make any kind of judgement on how the Sony vs MS battle will end. 2008 is crucial for the PS3, and if it does gain momentum (like the PS2 did in its second year), I would be very surprised if Sony doesn't come out on top again.

Regarding the Wii and future Nintendo strategy, I think they will return to a higher-spec strategy. However, that's inevitable since consumers by then will expect HD and more polished graphics. I'm quite sure they still won't aim for bleeding edge though, which will be even more pointless next time around. Graphics are nearing the point where they are good enough for it to be hard to judge on a technical level. Design will dictate success even more. Which could mean another advantage for Nintendo.

That's a couple of swedish öre.

 

I'm gonna have to disagree. The wii wasn't a wild gamble, they knew exactly what they were shooting for - a novel control scheme that would appeal to non-gamers, with a catalog of proven franchises, at a price point that virtually anyone could justify. They had already proven the existence and viability of the 'casual' market with the DS, and the success of their own brain age, nintendogs, etc. The wii was the next logical step aimed at that same market.

Regarding the price, they certainly are expensive considering the dated hardware inside, but nobody's buying game consoles because they're a good value if you consider the components they're built from... they want entertainment pure and simple. The PS3 is a steal at $500 when you consider what's inside, but its not going to supply $500 worth of fun. The 360 is only just now approaching the same price as the wii after a price drop, and even then the 'core' model is more or less pointless thanks to its lack of any means to save your games/downloads. By the time you buy a seperate storage device (either a hard drive or memory card) you might as well have bought the 'pro' package.

Anyhow, I still stand by the statement that Nintendo makes hardware for themselves first and foremost. If they want to make a mario or zelda that has crazy poly counts and special effects, then they may very well push the hardware to the limit in the next generation. Once upon a time, Nintendo set the standard for technological advancement in consoles, so its not impossible that they'd do it again. I just have my doubts that they will be pushing hardware in the way that other manufacturers are - its pretty clear that different ways of physically interacting with our games (pointing, touching, voice recognition, gestural input, wireless, etc.) is far more important to them than simply pushing the same games at a higher resolution.

 

Yep, I got confused! The statement was from almost four years ago, so I was a little fuzzy, and it took forever to find, too. Here is the actual DS-related quotation (the last paragraph):

http://cube.ign.com/articles/492/492253p1.html

I disagree, because as I see it, the relevant battle is already over. PS3 didn't sell at the price point at which Sony wanted to sell it. They had to drop down to compete with the systems that were actually doing well. A PS3 with wi-fi is now $400, $200 less than I paid for one, and that price is only going to go down. Knowing that the market is not going to be as large as Sony had hoped for a very expensive video game system (that isn't even a 3DO or Neo Geo!) is going to limit the price and specs of future consoles.

I really hope that you are right, because even with the crappy read speeds that Blu-Ray currently provides, as long as everyone has a hard drive, which all PS3 owners do, the PS3 has the potential to give us the coolest games of this generation. I think people forget that the PS3 controller can do a lot of what the Wii controller can do, especially if you hold it sideways (no games I know of support this).

 

Haven't played Mario Galaxy. In general, Mario games are my favorite Nintendo titles -- but I'm kind of getting sick of even that franchise. I have played Zelda. Yawn. (Actually every Zelda game makes me yawn.)

I've also played Metroid (yawn) and Mario Strikers (yawn) and a bunch of others.

I admire Nintendo for many things, but their policies towards third party developers have not, historically, been good, and the Wii is sorely lacking compelling titles.

I hope so, but it might just allow them to continue as they have for another two generations.

 

I hate sports, so I'll have to agree on the last count, and while I liked the new Zelda, I don't think it brought much new to the table. Tell me though, what IS a good modern game? (I'm really picky, but even I like some Wii games. PS3, on the other hand, has only one game I have liked so far.)

 

I'm very impressed with aspects of quite a few modern games, and several game concepts which haven't, unfortunately, been translated into actually great games.

World of Warcraft is a brilliantly executed game, it really is. I'd rather play WoW than almost any single player game right now (and I'm trying to avoid playing games at the moment). Unfortunately the expansion has added nothing but new skins for old content and concepts. "Hey it's just like <insert something you've seen or done before> only ten levels higher."

Final Fantasy XII -- surprisingly -- is quite incredibly good technically and in terms of gameplay ... except that, in the end, it's a Final Fantasy game (i.e. way too repetitive). It would also be great to see it running on the PS3 or XBox 360 rather than struggling to run on the PS2. I hope FF XIII or whatever builds on the huge improvements to the FF franchise in XII.

There's some very nice work going on in the fighting/adventure game genre (Sands of Time, God of War, Colossus, et al). Unfortunately, it all seems very "tunnel of fun" ish.

Indeed, "tunnel of fun" is way too dominant in modern games -- something that follows from the high production costs for content for AAA games. (If you're going to build a really gorgeous, detailed corridor -- the player better damn well have to walk through it.)

Wii Sports is really very nice in terms of core gameplay (well tennis is excellent golf is good once you give up trying to pretend it's really similar to golf, baseball does batting well but not pitching or fielding, boxing, and bowling are meh), but kind of half-assed in terms of its implementation. E.g. how hard would it have been to implement singles tennis, more golf holes, etc.? OK, maybe not in the initial, but why isn't there a Wii Sports II, or Wii Sports: Golf?

The control scheme in the DS Zelda game is really nice, but the game is boring and repetitive.

Revisiting the Wii for a moment: a huge advantage of low polygon / texture graphics is lower production costs and lower reliance on eye candy for selling a game. So instead of producing tunnels of fun, you could produce open-ended game play... But instead we just get lower production value tunnels of fun.

Aside from that I can't think of anything particularly head turning.

P.S. I agree that there's nothing compelling on the PS3 or XBox 360 either. I love the Wii, but we haven't turned it on in over a month.

 

"Mass Effect" for the 360 is the best game of the year. Its the best game since "Knights of the Old Republic".

 

I've got no problem with "tunnel of fun", but I don't want every game to be like that. I love action/adventure games, but they are almost always too long, becoming mindlessly repetitive. I prefer my adventure games to be short, so I can go through them like watching a movie, but too many people complain about short games, so developers are always filling them full of fluff gameplay.

The only games that I have played that have successfully implemented an "open" gameplay style were multiplayer games in which you could create your own content, such as the first few Tony Hawk games or the 2D Worms games, which are going strong once again (woo-hoo!). I tried Fable and Grand Theft Auto (and a clone of that, Spider-Man 2), but I hated them, because they felt more like performing boring chores than playing games to me. What other kind of non-tunnel gameplay might be good?

Chores. I actually bought KOTR twice (returned it within a few days the first time) because I wanted to like it so much. It just felt like doing the dishes, however. There's no accounting for taste, I suppose.

 

I suggest you keep buying it. Eventually you'll get it right
The only problem with Kotor, and games like it is that you start off with no cool powers, so the beginning is usually pretty tame. Many people don't want to get through the first level. Finish the game as good and evil and I promise you it is better than the story of ANY Star Wars movie. The story for Mass Effect is very compelling as well.

 

I also think they're both incredibly ugly, as well. It's not a graphical problem, just style...the nasty taste issue again.

And if you're wondering, my favorite-looking games are Okami, Ico, Kingdom Hearts, Beyond Good Evil, Rayman 2, and both PS2 God of Wars.

 

On the other hand, this mirrors what happened after the PS2 launch as well, except they didn't have MS as competitors. The PS2 also dropped quite a bit in price during the first year, and only after that gained it's momentum.

I'm not saying they'll win - too much is riding on stuff like Home and LBP to be able to call it - but IMHO they still have a fair chance. Especially as many territories are far less Xbox-friendly than the US.

 

You should try Eve Online. I've been "playing" it for a couple of weeks to see what it's like, and believe me it's not *fun*. It's a life sim. (And no, I won't be continuing.)