Zork wrote:You can throw in WiiWare later because I'll be honest, I know nothing about it because there is nothing in WiiWare that has even piqued my interest.
You make me sad by not acknowledging the awesomeness of Mega Man 9.
You know what I'm done...in the end a lot of games were going to be missing on this list and thats because in my opinion Smash Bros, Fire Emblem and a lot of these others could've been GAMECUBE TITLES.
I take it this is because these games don't really take advantage of the extra stuff the Wii control scheme gives us. I would argue that just because we have said control scheme doesn't mean we always need to use it. Look at the DS. Lots of good titles don't use the microphone nor the touch screen (the touch part, not the screen part). Should they be considered Game Boy Advance games?
Hell, if you're going down that track, PS3 games are just pretty PS2 games. All of them could have been PS2 games if they dropped the poly count a bit.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
As far as Mega Man 9 is concerned, I think he's trying to avoid anything that appeared on any other console. I realize that House of the Dead 2 and 3 did, but the compilation's unique to the Wii. Personally, I'd argue Ghost Squad is worth owning, and I actually liked Red Steel, but I realize I'm a minority there. And there are some horror games I'm looking forward to...if they ever get off the ground or get ported to the United States, which I think is probably unlikely.
RadarScope1 wrote:Corn619, I think you are lacking a sense of history. This is no fad, it is a return to form. Nintendo hasn't changed so much as we have. Hate to be the guy who plugs his blog, but I did just write something related to this topic this week.
What’s so remarkable about how Ninty has “changed” recently is how little change has actually taken place. In 1985, Nintendo rolled out a somewhat underpowered box in the U.S. market that appealed to a wide demographic: kids, families, both boys and girls, and plenty of people who had never spent time hanging out in an arcade in ’80s. Every time I think about the idea that Nintendo used to be hard core but isn’t anymore, I think about my best friend’s dad, who beat the original Legend of Zelda — the godfather of all ‘hardcore’ games — and never touched a videogame again, ever. There’s your “new” Wii market.
You have a valid point to certain extent. But, games that Nintendo used to develop were challenging, original, and fun to play. Nintendo developed games such as Wii sports, Wii fit and Wii Music are none of those. There is a reason they removed the word quality from there company seal. Nintendo holds no standard as to what games get developed and released on the Wii. I'll admit its not a bad system if you can push through the shovelware, but I had way more fun on my NES in the 80s. They've been milking the same franchises for over 20 years now and its time to switch it up. I like Zelda and Mario as much as the next guy but after the last installments I need something new and original.
Nintendo has never held a quality standard on third party games. The closest was the censoring done and the 5 game/company/year limit in the NES days. The latter helped in that a company had to put some thought into what they put out to ensure their five titles make a splash.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
MrPopo wrote:.You make me sad by not acknowledging the awesomeness of Mega Man 9.
Mega Man 9 is awesome, but it wasn't made exclusively for Wii and I can get it on something I spend more time on. Namely the 360.
I take it this is because these games don't really take advantage of the extra stuff the Wii control scheme gives us. I would argue that just because we have said control scheme doesn't mean we always need to use it. Look at the DS. Lots of good titles don't use the microphone nor the touch screen (the touch part, not the screen part). Should they be considered Game Boy Advance games?
Hell, if you're going down that track, PS3 games are just pretty PS2 games. All of them could have been PS2 games if they dropped the poly count a bit.
The Gameboy Advance games comments I wont' disagree with but the PS3/PS2 thing is a little off the rocker. We weren't really promised anything beyond a graphical advancement with the PS3. Sure they tooted their horn about their tacked on limited motion controls with the SixAxis but after a little bit they just gave up on that and moved on.
My point is, don't hype something up as being really cool and revolutionary and using that as your primary vehicle to sell things only to barely use it at all.
But then again I suppose thats the wonderful world of marketing we live in.
MrPopo wrote:. Should they be considered Game Boy Advance games?
I think he meant that those games do not need a Wii at all. I love Fire Emblem but Radiant Dawn can run on a Gamecube. The control is the same, the graphics are the same, the music (as awesome as it is) are the same. In that regard they are not "Wii" games as in "Wii>GC". It surprised me but it's mostly true. The Wii doesn't have so many good titles and I own one. I would really add only 3 titles to that list or so.
I think that the novelty of the Wiimote is running out and we are all realizing that it's not as good as it seemed as first. Bad controls can make any good make totally unplayable and I bet there are lot of good games that are being panned simply because the control sucks. The Wiimote is not precise at all and even with all the good programming of the world it is not reliable. The Wii potential is enormous but it's being handicaped by the bad controls.
Also it seems to me that graphically most Wii games are way below what they should be. F-Zero GX on the GC looks way better to me than Mario Kart on the Wii and the Wii should be better. I feel that the Wii is not being used at is full potential and it's the programmers' fault. Just compare Wario on brawl and Wario on Mario Kart. The difference is incredible.
This may be because for each good Wii game I can name I know of 20 crappy shovelware games but still, even some good games look not good enough. I'm not asking for PC graphics but some look ugly as hell.
I think that while the Wii is going down the future release of the extra motion sensor will male the Wii what we originally wanted it to be, games will be able to have complex Wiimote use like we wanted and not a simplified version like in No More Heroes or MadWorld because I bet the programmers would have loved more precise controls to allow a more varied moveset.
I bet there are lots of game projects on hold or shelved because the Wiimote sucked and did not allow what the programmers wanted. I bet the creators of Red Steel or Castlevania Judgment had in mind something better than what the games reflect and they eventually made a mediocre title.
I seriously hope that this fucking sensor arrives soon.
Looking for a cool game? Find it in my blog! Latest post: Often, games must be difficult http://eriktwice.com/
I love how everyone keeps saying that nintendo will cause another video game crash. actually nintendo in my opinion saved us (as a future programmer (still in uni) i think i can say us) from going bankrupt because of a stupid business plan.
video games are a form of entertainment. if you only think your preferences are the only ones, that are worth being made, you are a stuckup/selfish idiot
ps3,360 games = mostly action games that play alike (fps, gta clone, 3rd person shooter ect. (yeah i know there are many different games but i'm talking about majority) expensive to make, a lof of them are made to compete in the same time frame for the same limited audience. if a game had the best gameplay in the world, but terrible graphics, no one would give it a second chance/
wii games = cheap to make, wide selection of genres, only that they aren't the ones hardcore gamers play, graphics don't matter that much and are cheap to make (since it can't compete with ps3 like graphics a game has to have style (see de blob) to get your attention)
now let's compare this situation with movies.
if this generation was like the previous one, it would have been like movie studios only making blockbuster action movies witch mostly have to do with superheroes, or aliens.
but the casual games are the equivelent of the kids movie, the romantic comedy, the family movie, and many other fun to watch once in a lifetime movies.
can you imagine how it would be if we only has blockbusters? first of all. most movies wouldn't turn a profit, since they are expensive to make and they would be released close together (the ypotheseis here is that in the place of everymovie released there would be a blockbuster), thus creating a too crowded market for most movies.
but with family and ect genre movies, studios can fill the gap between their blockbusters, so every demographic gets it's dose, of the 7nth art.
so would you say a studio that won't make a superhero movie so it can make a romantic comedy, is ruining the movie business, just because they are cheap to make, and only a few people watch them compared to superhero movies?
Would you say that because girl flicks exist, there won't be more men movies made?
no that would be stupid.
what i wanted to get to is that.
Just because casual gaming is so big doesn't mean that hardcore games aren't going to be made. On the opposite, gaming studios will be able to make more money, with cheap to make (but still need to be good to sell) casual games, and with those funds they can take the risk of making a hardcore expensive game.
if nintendo hadn't come out with 2 cheap and easy to develop for, VERY successful systems, by this points in this generation, a lot more gaming studios would have gone bankrupt by the cost of making HD games.
Up to this point the increase in expenses to make a video game, hasn't been the same with the increase of gamers.
What that means, is that with such a small demographic, only a lucky few would have been able to make a profit in this generation.
It's the same with the PSone. There's no way the 80mil gamers of the 16-bit area would have been able to support the cost of making 3d games.
so it's you right not to like casual games, and wii games in general. But calling them shit, and that they are damaging the industry is pretty short minded. just cause you don't like them, doesn't make everyone who likes them stupid. did you like it when gamers were called kids stuck in a man's body? No cause that was misinformed.
anyway i'm too sleepy right now, i'm not sure i got my point across correctly, i'll check it and edit it tomorrow,
BoneSnapDeez wrote:The success of a console is determined by how much I enjoy it.
Zork wrote:You can throw in WiiWare later because I'll be honest, I know nothing about it because there is nothing in WiiWare that has even piqued my interest.
You make me sad by not acknowledging the awesomeness of Mega Man 9.
You know what I'm done...in the end a lot of games were going to be missing on this list and thats because in my opinion Smash Bros, Fire Emblem and a lot of these others could've been GAMECUBE TITLES.
I take it this is because these games don't really take advantage of the extra stuff the Wii control scheme gives us. I would argue that just because we have said control scheme doesn't mean we always need to use it. Look at the DS. Lots of good titles don't use the microphone nor the touch screen (the touch part, not the screen part). Should they be considered Game Boy Advance games?
Hell, if you're going down that track, PS3 games are just pretty PS2 games. All of them could have been PS2 games if they dropped the poly count a bit.
While I do not agree that all of the Wii games listed before this post could have been done on Wii, I do agree that the motion controls are really tacked on (Metroid, Mario, Zelda.) The PS3 has games that couldnt really have been done on PS2 with a simple reduction in polys because of more advanced AI processing abilities. Some things that go on in the games or the background in games really wows me sometimes, not just the graphical upgrades. Still, Sega Genesis gets more play than either by a significant amount.
owned: Atari VCS, Intellivision, ColecoVision, NES, NES2, Sega Master System, Turbografx-16, Genesis/Sega CD Model 1, Genesis/Sega CD Model 2/32x, SNES, Atari Jaguar, Virtual Boy, GBA, 3DO, Saturn, Playstation, PSone, N64, Dreamcast, PS2, Gamecube, Xbox, PSP, Xbox 360, Wii, PS3
wanted: Cd-I, Neo Geo AES
