You make some good points, but I'm afraid I still don't agree.
While you are right that, up until now, the joystick has been a left-handed action and the button pressing has been a right-handed action, there are a few other issues involved.
The Wii is something completely new. While it is a video gaming system, and a Nintendo system, it's pretty much in a league of its own. Comparing controller schemes between a Wii and a Gamecube would be akin to comparing gameplay between a computer and a Playstation (which is a palpable difference for anyone having played FPS games on both systems). You have to look at each in a completely different light and gauge what the best way is to use the benefits of each.
Now, I would wager that lefties will be quite able to use the Wii with a great deal of success. Most lefties I know use mice with their right hands, though Heather would also want to point out that for finer activities, like drawing or the like, using the mouse in this fashion is difficult or impossible.
That's really my concern. Is the Wii control scheme such that finer movements will need to be done to be successful at it?
Look at FPS games again. I think nearly all the successful ones on the market offer options to change the control scheme for right or left handed people. There's a reason for that.
As to Zelda specifically, remember a few things here. First, from what I've found online, this change of handedness for Link is VERY recent. Once Nintendo found a demand to have a more interactive sword scheme for Link, they changed the system, AND ALSO CHANGED HIS HANDEDNESS.
Why do this only at this point? Certainly not out of a fairness for righties to have a favorite hero be more balanced. They did it because they knew people would complain that, they being right handed and Link being left handed, the use of his sword and shield would be more difficult for them since things would be oriented opposite what they would be used to (as righties, NOT as gamers). Thus, I believe they switched it for this reason, to make 90% happy with the orientation and 10% less happy, rather than the other way around.
As to the balance of right and left hands, it's a bad argument. If Mario, Luigi, Samus and Kirby all switch their dominant hands, then you have an argument. Read a book series, watch a TV series, or a group of movies. The main characters don't change which hand is their main hand. It's part of developing who a character is. If you just arbitrarily change basic characteristics like that, it's harder to know who that person is.
Again, I'm not pissed at Nintendo so much for changing the hands, though I don't like that much. What I dislike about it is the idea that "We'll change the game to make it easier for right handed people, but at the same time offer no option to make it any easier for left handed people"
P.S. The Gamecube Link is still left handed. Further evidence of the above points.
You seem to have summarily overlooked everything I said Dan.
As I said, the change of hands in-game was made simply to address the fact that otherwise movement made by the right hand would translate to Link's left hand, and vice versa. Not only would this be the case with all right-handed people, but likely almost all left-handed people, since they are likely to hold things in the orientation that they have become accustomed to from years of older controllers. This is merely a visual change made to remove this desparity, not made to make either orientation "easier"
Also, switching the dominant hand of Link is NOT like switching Mario's or Samus's hand, because those characters have been supposedly the same character amoung all games. As I explained, nearly every Zelda game has a completely different Link (And a new Zelda and Ganon for that matter). It is often argued that all of the Links are likely descendants of one another, but that hardly precludes the idea that one of them is right handed. I know that they were originally going to make him left-handed again, and that the GC version still has him left handed. I am not trying to deny that this change was made for anything other than to make a stylistic improvement due to a new way of interacting with the game. I am simply arguing that there is no reason to fall back to "tradition" as a valid argument as to why it is wrong to change his diminant hand.
The only argument that you make that holds any air is that of the possibility that your non-dominant hand may not be able to accurately aim things such as the bow/arrow that is aimed with the remote. In the case of this, you will simply have to give it a try to find out, but my guess is that it will be a non-issue. Zelda has never tried to be an ultra-sophisticated first-person shooter that requires a dead-shot aim. In fact, since this game was also designed for the gamecube's controller, and one might argue that regardless of the hand it would be possible to be more accurate with the remote than with the thumb-stick, then it could likely be concluded that this is likely to not be any kind of an issue.
I didn't mean to ignore your points, but perhaps I did. I will try to address them here.
You argue that people are now used to controllers being oriented a certain way, that the change was made to make a right handed movement correspond to the right hand, and vice versa with the left hand. I understand that; I even agree with it personally. But without knowing exactly how the Wii-mote works, IE how sensitive it is, I can't say for sure that it would work well for a left-handed person. Thus my argument here is not that the change is bad, but that the change simply shifts the problem from right-handed people to left-handed people. And I still don't accept your premise of older controllers being used in that manner. While the joystick is on the left side as in previous controllers, the fact is that when you are pointing a controller at the screen, and using that as the main means of interaction, you have something completely new. With an old school controller, you rarely look at the controller while you are using it; you simply learn how to use it as is. What I mean is, an old school controller doesn't HAVE a hand preference. Which is perhaps the point you are making with the joystick; lefties might like hte stick better on the left side. But if you ask a left-handed person to point at something, I'd wager money they will use their left hand, and right handers will use their right. The question is, which is more important, the joystick pointing or the wii-mote pointing? You can prove me wrong if you want, all you have to do is draw a box with your right finger on the desk in front of you with a finger, then do the same thing with your left. Tell me if it was harder to do with one than the other. THAT is my point.
Yeah.... I'll give you the new game point. I could argue that each Mario is a new one, because honestly, how can someone be kidnapped THAT many times. My only real argument here is, despite the fact that each Link was apparently different, the fact that he has been a lefty EVERY time lends creedence to something more connective between the games. Whatever, it's not what is most important here.
Thank you for seeing the point there. It's just something I (or Heather more likely) will have to try out to understand how it works. I'm pretty sure Nintendo is going to showcase the crap out of this thing, so we can certainly give it a go before we buy one, but it just seemed like such a callous and quick change. One minute Link is a lefty. The next minute, he's a righty, and all seemingly to make things easier for righties. Just looking out for my left-handed friends and family :)
While you are right that, up until now, the joystick has been a left-handed action and the button pressing has been a right-handed action, there are a few other issues involved.
The Wii is something completely new. While it is a video gaming system, and a Nintendo system, it's pretty much in a league of its own. Comparing controller schemes between a Wii and a Gamecube would be akin to comparing gameplay between a computer and a Playstation (which is a palpable difference for anyone having played FPS games on both systems). You have to look at each in a completely different light and gauge what the best way is to use the benefits of each.
Now, I would wager that lefties will be quite able to use the Wii with a great deal of success. Most lefties I know use mice with their right hands, though Heather would also want to point out that for finer activities, like drawing or the like, using the mouse in this fashion is difficult or impossible.
That's really my concern. Is the Wii control scheme such that finer movements will need to be done to be successful at it?
Look at FPS games again. I think nearly all the successful ones on the market offer options to change the control scheme for right or left handed people. There's a reason for that.
As to Zelda specifically, remember a few things here. First, from what I've found online, this change of handedness for Link is VERY recent. Once Nintendo found a demand to have a more interactive sword scheme for Link, they changed the system, AND ALSO CHANGED HIS HANDEDNESS.
Why do this only at this point? Certainly not out of a fairness for righties to have a favorite hero be more balanced. They did it because they knew people would complain that, they being right handed and Link being left handed, the use of his sword and shield would be more difficult for them since things would be oriented opposite what they would be used to (as righties, NOT as gamers). Thus, I believe they switched it for this reason, to make 90% happy with the orientation and 10% less happy, rather than the other way around.
As to the balance of right and left hands, it's a bad argument. If Mario, Luigi, Samus and Kirby all switch their dominant hands, then you have an argument. Read a book series, watch a TV series, or a group of movies. The main characters don't change which hand is their main hand. It's part of developing who a character is. If you just arbitrarily change basic characteristics like that, it's harder to know who that person is.
Again, I'm not pissed at Nintendo so much for changing the hands, though I don't like that much. What I dislike about it is the idea that "We'll change the game to make it easier for right handed people, but at the same time offer no option to make it any easier for left handed people"
P.S. The Gamecube Link is still left handed. Further evidence of the above points.
Reply
As I said, the change of hands in-game was made simply to address the fact that otherwise movement made by the right hand would translate to Link's left hand, and vice versa. Not only would this be the case with all right-handed people, but likely almost all left-handed people, since they are likely to hold things in the orientation that they have become accustomed to from years of older controllers. This is merely a visual change made to remove this desparity, not made to make either orientation "easier"
Also, switching the dominant hand of Link is NOT like switching Mario's or Samus's hand, because those characters have been supposedly the same character amoung all games. As I explained, nearly every Zelda game has a completely different Link (And a new Zelda and Ganon for that matter). It is often argued that all of the Links are likely descendants of one another, but that hardly precludes the idea that one of them is right handed. I know that they were originally going to make him left-handed again, and that the GC version still has him left handed. I am not trying to deny that this change was made for anything other than to make a stylistic improvement due to a new way of interacting with the game. I am simply arguing that there is no reason to fall back to "tradition" as a valid argument as to why it is wrong to change his diminant hand.
The only argument that you make that holds any air is that of the possibility that your non-dominant hand may not be able to accurately aim things such as the bow/arrow that is aimed with the remote. In the case of this, you will simply have to give it a try to find out, but my guess is that it will be a non-issue. Zelda has never tried to be an ultra-sophisticated first-person shooter that requires a dead-shot aim. In fact, since this game was also designed for the gamecube's controller, and one might argue that regardless of the hand it would be possible to be more accurate with the remote than with the thumb-stick, then it could likely be concluded that this is likely to not be any kind of an issue.
Reply
You argue that people are now used to controllers being oriented a certain way, that the change was made to make a right handed movement correspond to the right hand, and vice versa with the left hand. I understand that; I even agree with it personally. But without knowing exactly how the Wii-mote works, IE how sensitive it is, I can't say for sure that it would work well for a left-handed person. Thus my argument here is not that the change is bad, but that the change simply shifts the problem from right-handed people to left-handed people. And I still don't accept your premise of older controllers being used in that manner. While the joystick is on the left side as in previous controllers, the fact is that when you are pointing a controller at the screen, and using that as the main means of interaction, you have something completely new. With an old school controller, you rarely look at the controller while you are using it; you simply learn how to use it as is. What I mean is, an old school controller doesn't HAVE a hand preference. Which is perhaps the point you are making with the joystick; lefties might like hte stick better on the left side. But if you ask a left-handed person to point at something, I'd wager money they will use their left hand, and right handers will use their right. The question is, which is more important, the joystick pointing or the wii-mote pointing? You can prove me wrong if you want, all you have to do is draw a box with your right finger on the desk in front of you with a finger, then do the same thing with your left. Tell me if it was harder to do with one than the other. THAT is my point.
Yeah.... I'll give you the new game point. I could argue that each Mario is a new one, because honestly, how can someone be kidnapped THAT many times. My only real argument here is, despite the fact that each Link was apparently different, the fact that he has been a lefty EVERY time lends creedence to something more connective between the games. Whatever, it's not what is most important here.
Thank you for seeing the point there. It's just something I (or Heather more likely) will have to try out to understand how it works. I'm pretty sure Nintendo is going to showcase the crap out of this thing, so we can certainly give it a go before we buy one, but it just seemed like such a callous and quick change. One minute Link is a lefty. The next minute, he's a righty, and all seemingly to make things easier for righties. Just looking out for my left-handed friends and family :)
Reply
Leave a comment