Oh Reggie...

[Malacite]

Reggie: Wii U's online functionality will be 'flexible' to publishers | Joystiq

If you're looking for Nintendo's Wii U to have a unified online network ... don't. While concrete plans for the system's online functionality have yet to be fully detailed, Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime made it sound like it'll be left entirely up to individual publishers in an interview with Forbes.

Nintendo is "creating a much more flexible system," Fils-Aime said, "that will allow the best approaches by independent publishers to come to bear. So instead of a situation where a publisher has their own network and wants that to be the predominant platform, and having arguments with platform holders, we're going to welcome that. We're going to welcome that from the best and the brightest of the third party publishers."

He said that Nintendo's system would be an "extremely robust online experience," but deferred to publishers regarding specifics. However, during the Ubisoft/Nintendo developer roundtable at E3, Ubisoft continually deferred to Nintendo. We hope this isn't how the actual development of the service is going.

Some of the comments below are just fucking hysterical.

Seriously Nintendo, either get with the program or just stop already with the shitty online. No one likes friend codes, and we sure as shit don't need PS2's online play again either.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Wii U isn't using friend codes. Ubi Soft verified this when Ghost Recon Online was detailed. There's also a link in that article linking to a story that says no friend codes, on Joystiq, too.

Farewell, Friend Codes: Wii U to have single online identity and friends list [update] | Joystiq

Good job getting your info from the comment section.

[Malacite]

Re: Oh Reggie...

[Icemage]

Re: Oh Reggie...

I think there's a fundamental part of Nintendo's DNA which will always make their online experience suck.

Nintendo, as a company, has always been extremely brand-conscious, and I get the impression that many of their decisions and policies stem from that. The draconian hoops that developers have to jump through to make voice chat work on the Wii is undoubtedly derived from this (can you name a Wii Speak enabled game off the top of your head without using Wikipedia that isn't Animal Crossing or The Conduit? Because I sure can't). Their own internal game production follows the same line of thinking; there's a reason they don't make anything rated above a marginal T ESRB rating.

Unified online handles will be a nice step in the right direction, but I can't help but harbor a sneaking suspicion that what we'll really see is just a unified friend code instead of a user-assignable handle. So when you sign up, you might just get some credit-card-sized string of numbers to represent "you", if only because Nintendo wouldn't want to catch flak from some angry 5 year old's mom on Fox News complaining about how her son was emotionally scarred from seeing someone calling themselves "gheyboi" in an online game.


Icemage

[Feba]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Right, because computers need the operating system to provide a unified online environment for all programs to work inside. Not like letting publishers handle that independently ever works out.


Really, consoles are just branded, tightly controlled computers; now more than ever. In fact, next time I feel like buying a non-portable computer, I'll strongly consider simply hacking some console and hooking it up to a TV to save myself a lot of hassle and money. If I hadn't wanted a laptop, importing my hacked Wii would've been an easy decision, really.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Oh Reggie...

can you name a Wii Speak enabled game off the top of your head without using Wikipedia that isn't Animal Crossing or The Conduit? Because I sure can't

I can think of Call of Duty Black Ops and The Conduit 2, which don't use Wii Speak, but actual wired headsets.

Also, from what I've seen on PSN, no one uses voice chat because its most affordable and accessible headset is also the worst on the market. People just don't want to drop money on a wired headset when they're only doing other people favors and getting that "boxed in" sound from bluetooth users in exchange.

I'd use the headset more often if it wasn't so painful to listen to other people.

[Icemage]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Right, because computers need the operating system to provide a unified online environment for all programs to work inside. Not like letting publishers handle that independently ever works out.

From the viewpoint of the people that make games? It certainly does seem that way. Not to mention for PCs you can run dedicated servers for a lot of games, which doesn't work for consoles unless the publishers handle that themselves (read: cost).

Steam is a good example of when the situation on PC works, but Steam ties PC digital and hardcopy purchases together in much the same way that XBL or PSN do. As for letting publishers handle things, how about those awesome dedicated servers for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, eh?

Really, consoles are just branded, tightly controlled computers; now more than ever. In fact, next time I feel like buying a non-portable computer, I'll strongly consider simply hacking some console and hooking it up to a TV to save myself a lot of hassle and money. If I hadn't wanted a laptop, importing my hacked Wii would've been an easy decision, really.

This much is true, but in practice the consistency of console hardware makes it easier to push that hardware to its limits without breaking your code.

For the Wii U specifically, I think the challenge for Nintendo is to show that they understand how and why people play online. I'll reserve final judgment until I have a chance to see what they put together, but right now there's a fair amount of skepticism given their track record, and for the most part it's well-deserved.


Icemage

[Feba]

Re: Oh Reggie...

which doesn't work for consoles unless the publishers handle that themselves (read: cost).

Pretty sure there already are console games out there that work off PTP; dedicated servers are equally possible, just give someone a server client to download and run on a standard PC if they want to play outside the official servers.

As for letting publishers handle things, how about those awesome dedicated servers for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, eh?

ITT, anything that COD does is a good basis for a standard of quality.

but in practice the consistency of console hardware makes it easier to push that hardware to its limits without breaking your code.

Oh don't get me wrong, it's not a negative, in the slightest; I completely agree. Computers push games; games push consoles.

For the Wii U specifically, I think the challenge for Nintendo is to show that they understand how and why people play online.

I think the real question is going to be whose online experience they concern themselves with.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Oh Reggie...

The honest truth is everyone could use a bit more Steam in their online services.

I look at Nintendo and their response to online so far is cold, MS and Steam sit on the hot end.

PSN is lukewarm, it just kinda asses around, not really sure what its supposed to be. They have a subscription service, but nothing about what the service provides is compelling to pay for. MS makes you pay to play online period, but look at how fast they get updates and fixes before a PSN version and sometimes even the PC version now. That subscription money at least pays for something I couldn't do myself.

PSN tons of games to digitally distribute, but god help you if you try to download it on a Satuday or Sunday and its even worse if you download directly to a PSP and not the PS3. PSN's store is just as pointlessly bulky as what Nintendo does and the sales, as they come are generally for things you don't want (sort of like the games PSN+ does for free).

The problem is rather than everyone following a model that works perfectly (Steam) and trying to compete within it, they're all trying to make their own unique service hoping we don't notice their shit stinks and also hoping no one notices what Steam and the App Store do.

And now here comes Origin with the most laughable model of all.

They're going to make it the only place you can get The Old Republic (dumb) and also going to have the premium edition of ME3 on it, but still put out the version people would buy on steam.

So why does this exist again?

[LeonstrifeLEV]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Because when you cut the middle man you use a rusty scalpel, you also cut the consumer that was seen near the middle man that filthy, filthy whore!

[Icemage]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Pretty sure there already are console games out there that work off PTP; dedicated servers are equally possible, just give someone a server client to download and run on a standard PC if they want to play outside the official servers.

I don't think we'll ever see a day when a closed platform holder (MS, Sony, Ninty) ever let any Joe off the street set up a server that connects to their internal closed network. The closest we've seen to this is the cross-platform play of FFXI and Portal 2, and those are both special cases.

ITT, anything that COD does is a good basis for a standard of quality.

I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I was pointing out that leaving the decision in the hands of publishers isn't going to necessarily produce good results even with the most popular franchises, let alone niche titles that a lot of publishers won't even bother to market.

I think the real question is going to be whose online experience they concern themselves with.

Agreed. I'm just of the opinion that leaving this decision solely to the publishers is asking for trouble if you're a platform holder like Nintendo.


Icemage

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Because when you cut the middle man you use a rusty scalpel, you also cut the consumer that was seen near the middle man that filthy, filthy whore!

I'm not talking about going full-on digital, I'm talking about making the downloadable wares specific to your special snowflake of a network a real sale for a change.

Sony, Nintendo and MS's services don't seem to keen on that. The PC market was ignored by gaming retail well before Steam ever happened, Steam just finished the job.

Also, we're treated like filthy dirty whores by publishers regardless. They're not willing to let go of the physical market, so they use digital distribution in the most draconian way possible to buy themselves a handful more sales new.

[Malacite]

Re: Oh Reggie...

I don't think we'll ever see a day when a closed platform holder (MS, Sony, Ninty) ever let any Joe off the street set up a server that connects to their internal closed network. The closest we've seen to this is the cross-platform play of FFXI and Portal 2, and those are both special cases.

Do those even count? With XI none of the 3 platforms really join into one another's network, they all just connecting to PoL. Now with Portal 2 and PSN mixing with Steam users, I can see the point.

[Firewind]

Re: Oh Reggie...

Nintendo: "Hai gaiz, how do i interweb?"

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Oh Reggie...

I don't think we'll ever see a day when a closed platform holder (MS, Sony, Ninty) ever let any Joe off the street set up a server that connects to their internal closed network. The closest we've seen to this is the cross-platform play of FFXI and Portal 2, and those are both special cases.

I wonder if you'll believe that if Origin and CoD Elite end up succeeding.

You seem fine with minor versions of that happening on PSN, XBLA and Steam now. I believe you called it "supporting the developer."