There is one thing that Nintendo does every other generation that separates it from its rivals:  innovation. 

Having spent the past week tramping through the Los Angeles Convention Center for E3, I have witnessed many things, from wondrous to campy to downright frustrating.  One major source of that frustration was the never-ending line for Nintendo’s Wii area, the most popular 100 square feet in Los Angeles for those three days.  The booth was surrounded by a towering wall covered in silk-screened photos of joyful humans interacting with a variety of Nintendo products.  Every day that I attempted to enter, I encountered a three-hour wait.  The line was so long that the end was on the other side of the warehouse-sized room, tucked into a dark corner near the only water fountain in the building.

Why was this happening?  What was it about the Wii (not ‘Nintendo Wii,’ the press kit points out, but rather just ‘Wii’), that would cause people who had flown from various parts of the world to waste so much of their limited time here in a line for yet another next-gen console?  Looking across the way to the PlayStation 3, the line was less than 20 minutes.  Maybe it was the curiosity factor of such a freaky name, which makes no sense in either English or Japanese (which has no W sound…the closest approximation would be Uii).  The PS3 was safe and boring.  People loved the freak out factor that Nintendo’s name produced.

It wasn’t just the name, though.  Nintendo has always been a leader in innovation.  Often, this is in the form of the game controller.  The Famicom had the very famous two buttons with four-way directional pad, a severe departure from the literal joystick with one button popular on the Atari.  The N64 was like nothing ever seen when it was introduced.  A three pronged controller with analog stick and gun-like handle, with more buttons than anyone knew what to do with (remember the Z-button?).

And now we have the Wii-volution.  After decided that a controller that looks like a universal remote was not enough, they added a wand attachment that truly changes the way games are played.  Moving it through space has effects in whatever game you are playing:  struggling with a fishing pole in ‘One Piece’, swinging around a sword in 'Red Steel', or throwing objects around a room in ‘Elebits.’  It’s forcing people to think differently, as Apple likes to say.

Examples of Wii Remote Functionality.  From the Nintendo.com website.

The question though is whether innovation like this is good or bad.  Obviously, the popularity of the Wii line is proof positive of interest in this new technology.   Well, that and the PS3 and XBOX 360 already had their previews at last year’s E3.  But does that necessarily mean the public is ready for change, or that it will take hold beyond the initial gimmick phase?

"I don’t want to exercise when I play a video game.”  This was a quote from a friend when talking about the Wii.  As with anything new, innovations in video gaming have to fight against a consumer’s complacency.  We fear change. 

Just take a look at the offerings at the most popular games this year at E3.  ‘Lost Planet’ looks beautiful with realistic landscapes, a variety of weapons, and visceral explosions.  But what is it really?  Just another third-person shooter a la ‘Metal Gear Solid’ or any Tom Clancy game, but on a larger scale. 

‘Prey,’ ‘Crysis,’ ‘Fear,’ etc., etc., are just more in a line of first-person shooters that haven’t changed much since Quake.  Once you added the ability to jump in these games, there wasn’t all that much further to go.

‘Battle for Middle Earth II,’ ‘Rise & Fall,’ and their ilk haven’t changed much since the ‘Command & Conquer’ days.  Hell, they haven’t changed since ‘Dune 2.’  And yet people were all over these games.  Clearly, if it ain’t broke, why fix it?

And let’s not even mention Dance Dance Revolution:  UNIVERSAL!

ldquo;If I see another first-person shooter or fantasy MMORPG, I am going to kill!” says Alex, a fellow E3 attendee next to me. 

“Don’t look behind you,” I replied.  There, on a gigantic screen behind his head, played the trailer for ‘Huxley’ from Webzen, which claims to be the first FPS MMORPG.  Presumably because there is always room for more nonsensical letters strung together in a sentence.

This interchange shows that perhaps all is not well in Gamer Land.  Maybe people are playing these games simply because there is nothing else available to them.  They want something to come along and break the monotony.  These are people who benefit most from innovation.  People like this are bored and frustrated, but don’t see anything new to excite them with the current offerings.

Look at the XBOX 360.  It’s the same as the original XBOX, just prettier.  And I don’t just mean the graphics.  The joystick is the same bastardization of the Nintendo GameCube/N64 family.  There's no real innovation to the package as a whole, just an upgrade in hardware and overall aesthetic appeal.  It's safe, but lacks any big innovation.

The PS3?  Sure it’s faster, but it hasn’t strayed all that far from the original PS design.  The joystick has always been the weakest part of Sony’s consoles, yet they kept the design, throwing in a gyroscope to up the wow factor.  Now you can fly a plane just by flying the controller around.

The only thing exciting here was the Wii.  It not only gets the consumer excited, it manages to excite game developers.  ‘Sadness’ is a game that was actually inspired by the Wii’s concept.  The Wii focused on the idea that gameplay was more important than just improved graphics, so they made a game in black and white.  Using the controller wand, you can swat a torch at rats or slit throats with a shard of glass. 

It’s like the classic battle between art and commerce.  Nintendo has done well enough that they can take chances and express themselves artistically.  Other companies here seem to only think of money.  It’s basically the same forces that Hollywood execs and film directors fight about constantly.

Now, there are two fine lines that have to be balanced to keep innovation from falling over into gimmick territory (need I mention the Glove or Nintendo’s ROB the robot, who seemed to exist for only one game), or worse…falling over the line between reasonable and impossible.

Wii revisits the virtual reality of the glove, but without scaring people off by moving too far, too fast, by including the regular controller (though it may look like a remote, it is really just a longer version of the original Famicom pad).  They have a nice balance between practical and revolutionary (pun intended).

PS3 on the other hand completely red-rover’s over to the impossible side of the latter line.  They have a cell processor consisting of eight processing units, possibly accounting for the “probably too cheap” price of $600, according to Sony’s head of Computer Entertainment, Ken Kutaragi.  As a result, developers making games for it complain that it is much harder to program for than the XBOX 360 and worlds harder than for the Wii, with no good middleware tools to help them.

It also doubles as a Blu-ray player.  As another E3 attendee pointed out, he doesn’t want a Blu-ray player.  He just wants a console that plays good games.  When DVD players came out, people wanted them.  They were cheaper, easier to use, and opened new markets to TV shows.  How many people even know what to do with a Blu-ray drive?

This is an example of innovation going so fast that it completely ignores the desires of the consumers.  Ken Kutaragi doesn’t care what you want, he knows what you need!  This disconnect is what is dangerous in the world of innovation in video games.  For example, when disc-based games became popular, Nintendo actually resisted this innovation.  Why?  A big reason is that it recognized consumers dislike of load screens.  On a cartridge, everything loads instantaneously.  They know how to take it slow.

Nintendo and Sony are the best examples of the good and bad of innovation.  One side is about using innovation to increase the amount of fun; the other is using innovation to increase the amount of money they can make.  It has gimmicks and big numbers, but it suffers in the originality or fun categories. 

Those who fear change will gravitate towards the XBOX 360 for a safe transition to the next generation with games that are bigger and faster versions of the same games they have been playing for the past 6 years.  The Wii will attract those who are mind-numbingly bored by the current state of games and want to be excited like a kid.  The PS3 has taken innovation and the famous concept that “absolute power corrupts absolutely” and run with it, and no one seems certain of where they will end up.

They should probably look behind them and notice that few are following them.

I am not writing this as a review of consoles.  Personally, I don’t care.  But it’s really as if they purposely made their companies and consoles into very expensive metaphors for the video game industry.  And innovation in general. 

What it ultimately comes down to though, is whether or not the game player wants innovation.  So, then I ask you:  is innovation good or bad? 

You tell me.

Copyright © 2006 Michael T. Coleman. All rights reserved.