Menegrothx wrote:Violent By Design wrote:I don't really understand how a video game can be objectively better or worse, it is entertainment.
I admitted that a few pages back already, but that was such a outrageous claim that I intentionally used that term again. Metroid, Super Mario Bros 1&3, Final Fantasy&Dragon Quest, Legend of Zelda, Mega Man vs Super Mario Sunshine, Resident Evil 4, Luigi's Mansion, Mario Party 4, Mario Kart: Double Dash, Smash Bros Melee, Pokémon Colosseum etc.... it's pretty clear which console helped to shape the gaming as it is and create the basis for many video game genres, where as a large bulk of Gamecubes best games are just sequels to game series' that started on NES/SNES (or even N64). That doesn't mean that Gamecube hasn't got original&innovative games of it's own, it does (RE4, Pikmin, Eternal darkness etc). Just not nearly as much as NES, or even SNES, had.
I'm confused, how does being original equate to being objectively better? You need to branch those points (and most of SNES' big titles are sequels or utilize name brand from the NES era, the SNES is very well loved but you're making it seem to be something it is not - the n64 for example was a much more ambitious console and still successful).
No it's not. Wii has sold more consoles to sell casual garbage like Wii Fit and sports to people who usually don't play video games.
That doesn't sound very objective. Video games are video games, and people are people. If anything, you're actually inserting your bias. The Wii has drawn more people into gaming than the SNES has, and the Wii has out sold it's competition far greater than the SNES has as well (with out the benefit of a monopoly from the previous generation that the SNES and the Nintendo brand was much more synonymous with gaming back then).
But SNES has a lot more important and groundbreaking games in it's library (yes, the first waggle/motion control games of Wii were groundbreaking).
Sounds pretty subjective to me.
And by the way, those motion controls caused everyone else to get motion controls too. That seems like influence to me
You judge a console by it's game library, not by how many games it has sold or how many units it has sold.
Aka....you judge it by subjective merits. Don't use the word objective in less you're actually going to be objective. Numbers are objective, what a person finds to be good quality or bad quality is subjective. As a huge film buff, I get really annoyed when I read people throwing the word objective around.
And all console generations thus far have sold better than the last one. Population growth, economic growth, video games becoming more mainstream, consoles becoming less about pure gaming. Those all have helped to increase console sales.
This is correct, and in the case of the Wii - it raised the stakes yet again. Even if you wanted to some how put some handicap, I am positive the Wii did more to attract more people than the SNES did for its time.
You'll have to define what makes a game objectively better or worse, because I am not seeing it. You seem to just be going by either what you like or do not like, what you think people like or do not like (acclaim), or what games are original (which I don't get how that makes something better. Dr.J came before Michael Jordan, does that make him objectively better?)
