Counterpoint: Spielberg's game

There seemed to be two possible reactions to yesterday's post about the Spielberg game-- "the Wii game sounds better than the 360/PS3 game" and "the opposite of what the first thing was." Eric gently implied that he was not a fan of Spielberg's intentions for the Wii. Since this is a rather divisive issue, he suggested I offer a counterpoint to his assessment that the other systems are getting the better deal. And, since I generally enjoy disagreeing with things, I accepted. But, being a professional grump, I couldn't decide which part to disagree with.

First, then, I'll take the cynical approach and disagree with the potential quality assessment. This is the idea that the action game sounds better than the Jenga-inspired puzzle game we're getting. Well, I'll tell you right now, a game that is one long escort mission built around an AI that is supposed to be adaptive? That sounds basically like torture.

Second, I'll address the idea that we're getting shorted on non-casual content. This is just true. However, from Spielberg's perspective, it's a smarter decision to put the puzzle game on the Wii. In fact, he probably thinks that the money from the Wii game will help fund the riskier one on the other systems. Between the Wii, the DS, Flash games, and cell phones, we're in the midst of a casual games revolution. Spielberg has always made populist movies, and it's no surprise that he'd jump straight for the widest possible audience with games.

These two seemingly unrelated points allow me to arrive at a fairly tidy conclusion: we have the choice of a terrible game that won't sell, or an insubstantial but potentially fun game that'll make a bundle. And, most importantly, no games based on A.I.