The Wii’s innovation is not in its interface its in tis simplicity and accessibility be it the dreams of fans or the intentions of developers. The wii’s revolution was not in its attention to “serious” games.
The Wii’s revolution is in the past. In the same way that my father, when he was young played pong and in the way he now plays Wii golf.
Its in the way the wii is perceived and its now autonomic relation to modern gaming.
Another example is the Wii’s Virtual console which takes classic games that were always available but never accessible and makes them attractive to a new unexperienced audience. It’s clear that Wii’s revolution is “accessibility”.
Our assumptions and the way we define “innovation” and immersion although incorrect have not been completely pointless.
The wii motion plus is the next step.
The Wii’s revolution introduced and welcomed accessibility and consumerism , creating a new market for the Wii motionplus, an intuitive new device that absolves most of the problems seasoned gamers have with gesture based controls.
And what about the Wii 2?
Although the wii does not revolutions the way we play it has undeniably created something much more important, a new growing market. Its encapsulated entire demographics sustaining a market open to the next revolution.
The revolution that we incorrectly assumed and impatiently demanded.
The wii2 could increase graphical fidelity and bring its adoring market accessible intuitive controls.
Is the Wii the revolution we thought it was No? Could it be? Yes, it could prove the catalyst for the greatest transformation on any one medium.
To encapsulate my contention: the wii and gesture has strong potential to heighten physicality in games, but it can only be done to its, self deserved extent. To create immersion or meaning via an interface that interface needs to be at a constant level of complexity. Which disagrees directly with the Wii’s design and purpose. (accessibility)
Furthermore to assume and to name an interface an innovation in interactive media is a fairly ignorant claim. A game should not be defined by the system its on or the interface that’s used to enjoy it. A game should be an abstraction of on idea, one that works within the confines of a medium in such a way that the confines disappear. This is immersion. This is good game design in its simplest definition.
Michele & Rhys
P.s If anyone would like to upload there slides in a flash format. First upload here
then when it loads (takes about 1min) you can click on the file and copy paste the embedded link (html) into your blog post