mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
3rd parties are deathly afraid of Nintendo
- Thread starter jkam
- Start date
PawnTakesKing
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 3 (100%)
[quote name='dmaul1114']Just sucks for any gamers (like myself) who hoped the Wii would have enough real games to keep them satisfied, as that's not looking likely. Even people like myself , who are far from being hardcore gamers in terms of amount of time have/are willing to devote for games look to be hard pressed to be satisfied with just a Wii in the house.[/QUOTE]
QUOTED. FOR. TRUTH.
I'm sorry. I love Nintendo, and I've owned every single system since the NES days, but the Wii just isn't doing it for me (although the announcements yesterday did convince me to hold onto mine for just a little longer).
As soon as the new 360 bundles drop, I'm picking one up.
QUOTED. FOR. TRUTH.
I'm sorry. I love Nintendo, and I've owned every single system since the NES days, but the Wii just isn't doing it for me (although the announcements yesterday did convince me to hold onto mine for just a little longer).
As soon as the new 360 bundles drop, I'm picking one up.
[quote name='PawnTakesKing']QUOTED. FOR. TRUTH.
I'm sorry. I love Nintendo, and I've owned every single system since the NES days, but the Wii just isn't doing it for me (although the announcements yesterday did convince me to hold onto mine for just a little longer).
As soon as the new 360 bundles drop, I'm picking one up.[/quote]
I realize that different people have different "thirsts" when it comes to videogame playing, but how many games do you really need? The console's been on the market for roughly 10 months, and I could definitely find 10 games that are worth playing.
Is one good game per month ludicrously low or something? I don't know how people can expect a AAA title every week, it's just not feasible.
I'm sorry. I love Nintendo, and I've owned every single system since the NES days, but the Wii just isn't doing it for me (although the announcements yesterday did convince me to hold onto mine for just a little longer).
As soon as the new 360 bundles drop, I'm picking one up.[/quote]
I realize that different people have different "thirsts" when it comes to videogame playing, but how many games do you really need? The console's been on the market for roughly 10 months, and I could definitely find 10 games that are worth playing.
Is one good game per month ludicrously low or something? I don't know how people can expect a AAA title every week, it's just not feasible.
Reality's Fringe
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 8 (100%)
"Why should I try when someone else is so much better than me?"
Sounds like a lot of people I know. It's totally not a self-serving excuse for being a dismal failure at all.
Sounds like a lot of people I know. It's totally not a self-serving excuse for being a dismal failure at all.
[quote name='dmaul1114']Metroid Prime 3 kicked all kinds of ass, as did Zelda. Super Paper Mario was ok as well. RE4 kicks ass if you haven't played it elsewhere.
If Wii Sports is your cup of tea, there are plenty of other minigames out there, some of which may appeal to you.
If not, you should sell the Wii it seems to be even less for you than it is for me.
[/quote]
Metroid Prime got buried under Halo hype. Zelda isn't recent. RE4 is a remake, and many of us played the original. Also, my appeal to Wii sports was that it was nice and fun to pick up and play, especially with guests. I did contemplate getting Warioware though.
If Wii Sports is your cup of tea, there are plenty of other minigames out there, some of which may appeal to you.
If not, you should sell the Wii it seems to be even less for you than it is for me.
[/quote] Metroid Prime got buried under Halo hype. Zelda isn't recent. RE4 is a remake, and many of us played the original. Also, my appeal to Wii sports was that it was nice and fun to pick up and play, especially with guests. I did contemplate getting Warioware though.
Everything gets buried by Halo hype.
I think people stopped buying bananas for Halo 3.
Metroid Prime 3 is a great game. I'm sure enjoying it. And it's well made enough that if you have a Wii and consider yourself a gamer, you owe it to yourself to pick it up. It really is that simple.
I think people stopped buying bananas for Halo 3.
Metroid Prime 3 is a great game. I'm sure enjoying it. And it's well made enough that if you have a Wii and consider yourself a gamer, you owe it to yourself to pick it up. It really is that simple.
[quote name='evilmax17'] The console's been on the market for roughly 10 months, and I could definitely find 10 games that are worth playing.[/QUOTE]
Well I couldn't (especially if I'm unwilling to play games that I already played, in a slightly reduced form, on the GC). We have negated one another's anecdotes.
I can understand one Wii owner coming in asking "Where's the games?". Maybe they wanted a cute console and took the plunge. But any more comments than that one makes me think somebody's being dishonest with his/her self. We, and when I write "we" I mean around 90-95% of Wii owners, bought the Wii for access to Nintendo titles. I'd like to see more quality 3rd party games, just like I'd like to see better VC pricing, but what the hell. I knew what I was walking into when I fired up the Wiimobile at launch.
The 3rd party concerns about the lifespan of the console are reasonable to an extent. I suppose maybe that might cause developers to balk, and it's fair enough: no 4 year timelines and 100 person development teams. But I'm puzzled how fears about lifespan go hand in hand with the console's "popularity dropping suddenly." Do they honestly believe the market for the Wii console is that close to saturation? Do the concerns connect in that developers are consequently looking for the Wii 2 to pop up at any minute?
Even if the next Wii does come sooner than later, I'd hope that it would feature BC for Wii titles the same way that the Wii does for GC titles. In which case the concerned developers can simply port those Wii titles to the Wii 2 and get that $50-60 MSRP that they're after. Hell, even Nintendo ported the dick out of Zelda & SPM. So the console lifespan argument isn't a concern.
Well I couldn't (especially if I'm unwilling to play games that I already played, in a slightly reduced form, on the GC). We have negated one another's anecdotes.
I can understand one Wii owner coming in asking "Where's the games?". Maybe they wanted a cute console and took the plunge. But any more comments than that one makes me think somebody's being dishonest with his/her self. We, and when I write "we" I mean around 90-95% of Wii owners, bought the Wii for access to Nintendo titles. I'd like to see more quality 3rd party games, just like I'd like to see better VC pricing, but what the hell. I knew what I was walking into when I fired up the Wiimobile at launch.
The 3rd party concerns about the lifespan of the console are reasonable to an extent. I suppose maybe that might cause developers to balk, and it's fair enough: no 4 year timelines and 100 person development teams. But I'm puzzled how fears about lifespan go hand in hand with the console's "popularity dropping suddenly." Do they honestly believe the market for the Wii console is that close to saturation? Do the concerns connect in that developers are consequently looking for the Wii 2 to pop up at any minute?
Even if the next Wii does come sooner than later, I'd hope that it would feature BC for Wii titles the same way that the Wii does for GC titles. In which case the concerned developers can simply port those Wii titles to the Wii 2 and get that $50-60 MSRP that they're after. Hell, even Nintendo ported the dick out of Zelda & SPM. So the console lifespan argument isn't a concern.
[quote name='Krymner']I believe one major problem that is hurting 3rd parties on the Wii is that they aren't following Nintendo's business model. Nintendo's new mantra for the past couple of years has been to branch out away from the hardcore gamers and start appealing to the more casual gamer and expanding the userbase towards non-tradional gamers.[/quote]
This makes some sense, but then this part seems contradictory.
[quote name='Krymner']
It has been Nintendo 1st-party titles leading the casual gaming market, and the 3rd parties just follow with similar games. How many Brain Training knock-offs have there been? How many pet sims have followed Nintendogs?
[/QUOTE]
So 3rd parties are suffering because they're not following Nintendo's lead and making games for the casual market. Yet you then say they are suffering for ripping off Nintendo's first party casual games.
That doesn't really jive. In the past they largely ripped off first party "hardcore games" and made mone doing so (with of course some innovative stuff from the larger third party developers) so they should be able to do so by ripping off the casual games Nintendo Makes.
The problem is they are putting out shovelware, poor quality rip offs. If a third party company put out a Brain Age game that was more fun/in depth than the nintendo one's, I'm sure it would sell well.
Same if they could put out a casual sports game that was better than Wii Sports.
[quote name='Krymner']
The word of video games is changing. This isn't the same market that existed 10 years ago. Developers need to get off their ass and realize this.[/quote]
I wouldn't go that far. The 360, and it's games, are selling very well. There's still market for Hardcore games. Nintendo had just been getting their ass kicked in this market the past two generations, so they decided to shift and focus on their fanboys and casual gamers. It has paid dividends for them.
But that doesn't mean that Sony and MS don't still have a huge market of hardcore/more serious gamers that they can make a profit selling traditional games too.
Personally, I don't like the direction Nintendo's taking as I don't really dig most of the casual games. They're ok on the DS, as I like a quick pick up and play game to play in bed before going to sleep, on the plane etc. But when I fire up my consoles, I generally don't do so unless I have a solid couple hours or more to sit and play.
So while Nintendo has long been my favorite developer, it may be time for me to part ways with them on the console front if they continue in this direction as I can't justify keeping the Wii around for just 3-4 games a year that are worthy buying to me.
This makes some sense, but then this part seems contradictory.
[quote name='Krymner']
It has been Nintendo 1st-party titles leading the casual gaming market, and the 3rd parties just follow with similar games. How many Brain Training knock-offs have there been? How many pet sims have followed Nintendogs?
[/QUOTE]
So 3rd parties are suffering because they're not following Nintendo's lead and making games for the casual market. Yet you then say they are suffering for ripping off Nintendo's first party casual games.
That doesn't really jive. In the past they largely ripped off first party "hardcore games" and made mone doing so (with of course some innovative stuff from the larger third party developers) so they should be able to do so by ripping off the casual games Nintendo Makes.
The problem is they are putting out shovelware, poor quality rip offs. If a third party company put out a Brain Age game that was more fun/in depth than the nintendo one's, I'm sure it would sell well.
Same if they could put out a casual sports game that was better than Wii Sports.
[quote name='Krymner']
The word of video games is changing. This isn't the same market that existed 10 years ago. Developers need to get off their ass and realize this.[/quote]
I wouldn't go that far. The 360, and it's games, are selling very well. There's still market for Hardcore games. Nintendo had just been getting their ass kicked in this market the past two generations, so they decided to shift and focus on their fanboys and casual gamers. It has paid dividends for them.
But that doesn't mean that Sony and MS don't still have a huge market of hardcore/more serious gamers that they can make a profit selling traditional games too.
Personally, I don't like the direction Nintendo's taking as I don't really dig most of the casual games. They're ok on the DS, as I like a quick pick up and play game to play in bed before going to sleep, on the plane etc. But when I fire up my consoles, I generally don't do so unless I have a solid couple hours or more to sit and play.
So while Nintendo has long been my favorite developer, it may be time for me to part ways with them on the console front if they continue in this direction as I can't justify keeping the Wii around for just 3-4 games a year that are worthy buying to me.
Ugh, come on now. We've been through these discussions endlessly about the Wii.
There's little to no "good" third party support now because all those same companies swore the thing would be dead by now. 10 months later and only some of them are finally willing to think about bringing "quality" games over. I think Monster Hunter 3 speaks for itself that Japanese companies are starting to re-evaluate the Wii's status.
I mean we're still hearing "this is just the Gamecube with motion." Not with third party support. Tecmo and Rockstar weren't around for the Cube or the 64 (unless you count DMA Design when they made Armorines). Even Namco didn't do a whole lot. And I imagine within a year, we'll truly know whether or not the system is going to get better attention or not.
Why does every discussion about the Wii - outside of the threads that are following a game specifically - always end up mired in these same little circles?
There's little to no "good" third party support now because all those same companies swore the thing would be dead by now. 10 months later and only some of them are finally willing to think about bringing "quality" games over. I think Monster Hunter 3 speaks for itself that Japanese companies are starting to re-evaluate the Wii's status.
I mean we're still hearing "this is just the Gamecube with motion." Not with third party support. Tecmo and Rockstar weren't around for the Cube or the 64 (unless you count DMA Design when they made Armorines). Even Namco didn't do a whole lot. And I imagine within a year, we'll truly know whether or not the system is going to get better attention or not.
Why does every discussion about the Wii - outside of the threads that are following a game specifically - always end up mired in these same little circles?
[quote name='dmaul1114']That's why I said it's doing better. Most of the Japanese games it's getting are pretty mediocre--see Blue Dragon.
It's not closing in on getting any big games like Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest etc. and some of the games from companies like Capcom are really western style games--i.e. Dead Rising.[/QUOTE]
You are wrong there - Blue Dragon is excellent. It is my favorite 360 game of the year so far (though I'm hoping Katamari will overtake it). I'm glad those types of games are coming for the 360, otherwise it would be mostly an XBLA-game playing system for me. I expected the Wii to start getting many more of these types of things and take over the JRPG/J-quirky game mantle from the PS2. So far it hasn't happened, but we will see (Monster Hunter 3 may be the beginning of this though).
As for the throwaway comments by others about the Wii having no games - if you ignore Metroid, at a minimum, then such comments are meaningless... I can certainly see the lack of good 3rd party games though. I hope it will pick up soon... Just about the only one the rest of this year I have any interest in is Rayman Raving Rabbids 2.
Edit - Hadn't read Strell's comment yet (the one above mine). Of course, that is the obvious truth. But yet for some reason you need to keep repeating it here over and over. Let's not forget how many CAGs thought they would be able to stroll into GS in the Spring after the Wii was released (or perhaps, more "realistically" go to CraigsList) and pick one up for $100 because everyone got tired of the "fad" and traded it in after 6 months...
It's not closing in on getting any big games like Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest etc. and some of the games from companies like Capcom are really western style games--i.e. Dead Rising.[/QUOTE]
You are wrong there - Blue Dragon is excellent. It is my favorite 360 game of the year so far (though I'm hoping Katamari will overtake it
). I'm glad those types of games are coming for the 360, otherwise it would be mostly an XBLA-game playing system for me. I expected the Wii to start getting many more of these types of things and take over the JRPG/J-quirky game mantle from the PS2. So far it hasn't happened, but we will see (Monster Hunter 3 may be the beginning of this though).As for the throwaway comments by others about the Wii having no games - if you ignore Metroid, at a minimum, then such comments are meaningless... I can certainly see the lack of good 3rd party games though. I hope it will pick up soon... Just about the only one the rest of this year I have any interest in is Rayman Raving Rabbids 2.
Edit - Hadn't read Strell's comment yet (the one above mine). Of course, that is the obvious truth. But yet for some reason you need to keep repeating it here over and over
. Let's not forget how many CAGs thought they would be able to stroll into GS in the Spring after the Wii was released (or perhaps, more "realistically" go to CraigsList) and pick one up for $100 because everyone got tired of the "fad" and traded it in after 6 months...[quote name='evilmax17']I realize that different people have different "thirsts" when it comes to videogame playing, but how many games do you really need? The console's been on the market for roughly 10 months, and I could definitely find 10 games that are worth playing.
[/quote]
For me, Zelda and Metroid have been the only "worthy" purchases. SPM was ok, but I could have gone with out. Everything else has just been an ok rental, or something I didn't like at all. And Mario Galaxy is the only must buy for the rest of 2007 for me, with a few others like Zak and Wiki being potential rentals.
So that's 3 must buy games for me in a year. Hard to justify the $250 purchase I made last year for that. Though I realize first years are always slow, and the second year tends to pick up (see 360) so that's the one reason I haven't sold it yet. Well, that and Mario Galaxy.
I'd probably say 6-8 AAA games a year are what I'd need to be happy. And by AAA I just mean something I'm interested in enough to drop $50 day one. So personal AAA games I guess you could say. And again, only 3 from Nov 2006-Dec 2007, and only Smash Bros so far in 2008 for me--though to be fair they've just not announced much for next year yet (again why I haven't ditched it yet).
[/quote]
For me, Zelda and Metroid have been the only "worthy" purchases. SPM was ok, but I could have gone with out. Everything else has just been an ok rental, or something I didn't like at all. And Mario Galaxy is the only must buy for the rest of 2007 for me, with a few others like Zak and Wiki being potential rentals.
So that's 3 must buy games for me in a year. Hard to justify the $250 purchase I made last year for that. Though I realize first years are always slow, and the second year tends to pick up (see 360) so that's the one reason I haven't sold it yet. Well, that and Mario Galaxy.
I'd probably say 6-8 AAA games a year are what I'd need to be happy. And by AAA I just mean something I'm interested in enough to drop $50 day one. So personal AAA games I guess you could say. And again, only 3 from Nov 2006-Dec 2007, and only Smash Bros so far in 2008 for me--though to be fair they've just not announced much for next year yet (again why I haven't ditched it yet).
PleasantOne
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 8 (100%)
[quote name='Strell']Everything gets buried by Halo hype.
I think people stopped buying bananas for Halo 3.[/quote]
I really just don't get the wii hate/dislike/mild irritation/whatever. Do I think the Wii could be better? Of course. Are the games lacking? I guess? I don't know, I still have 4 or 5 Wii games on my shelf that I haven't gotten to yet.
And I really don't get all the "I hate my Wii and I should have just gotten a 360" stuff... that's like comparing apples and oranges... no, not even oranges... apples and burritos... or apples and kung pao chicken. It's like if you wanted to see an action movie and you instead knowingly bought tickets to a romantic comedy and then bitched about it afterwards. I didn't buy a Wii planning to play stuff like Forza or Halo on it. I bought the Wii for stuff like Warioware, Mario Kart, Trauma Center, Animal Crossing, and other quirky Japanese stuff. The Wii is an entirely different animal, and I thought we pretty much all understood that from the getgo?
I think people stopped buying bananas for Halo 3.[/quote]
I really just don't get the wii hate/dislike/mild irritation/whatever. Do I think the Wii could be better? Of course. Are the games lacking? I guess? I don't know, I still have 4 or 5 Wii games on my shelf that I haven't gotten to yet.
And I really don't get all the "I hate my Wii and I should have just gotten a 360" stuff... that's like comparing apples and oranges... no, not even oranges... apples and burritos... or apples and kung pao chicken. It's like if you wanted to see an action movie and you instead knowingly bought tickets to a romantic comedy and then bitched about it afterwards. I didn't buy a Wii planning to play stuff like Forza or Halo on it. I bought the Wii for stuff like Warioware, Mario Kart, Trauma Center, Animal Crossing, and other quirky Japanese stuff. The Wii is an entirely different animal, and I thought we pretty much all understood that from the getgo?
[quote name='PawnTakesKing']
As soon as the new 360 bundles drop, I'm picking one up.[/QUOTE]
$350 is still too much for me, since I have no interest in Forza 2 or MUA--and they'd sell for shit since they're on the same disc.
Drop to $300 and I'd be on it--even for just the cpremium console without those games.
I'd probably do $350 if Amazon has another of their own bundles like earlier in the year when they were giving away Gears of War as long as it's a game or two that I actually want and would buy if I weren't getting it for free.
As soon as the new 360 bundles drop, I'm picking one up.[/QUOTE]
$350 is still too much for me, since I have no interest in Forza 2 or MUA--and they'd sell for shit since they're on the same disc.
Drop to $300 and I'd be on it--even for just the cpremium console without those games.
I'd probably do $350 if Amazon has another of their own bundles like earlier in the year when they were giving away Gears of War as long as it's a game or two that I actually want and would buy if I weren't getting it for free.
[quote name='PleasantOne']I bought the Wii for stuff like Warioware, Mario Kart, Trauma Center, Animal Crossing, and other quirky Japanese stuff. The Wii is an entirely different animal, and I thought we pretty much all understood that from the getgo?[/QUOTE]
I bought it for stuff like Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Smash Bros etc. The hardcore Nintendo franchises. And also mainly because I bought into the motion control hype.
Now I'm back where I was with the GC--stuck with a console that will just have the 3-4 (or less) big Nintendo franchises a year I want to play, and the occasional third party game worth playing (i.e. Eternal Darkness, RE4). And it looks like it could be even worse this time with the focus on casual gamers reducing the overall number of "real" games.
I'm not really bitter at Nintendo, it's been since the SNES that one of their consoles could be the main system for a hardcore gamer as quality software has just been to few and far between since the N64. As such it's been necessary to own multiple consoles (had a N64 and PS1, a GC and a DC, X-box and PS2).
What I'm more pissed at is Sony for launching at $500-600 and MS for launching at $400 for the non-tard pack, having a ridiculouse failure rate, and only cutting price $50 nearly 2 years post-launch. In short, they've made it too expensive to own multiple consoles for this poor grad student, so they get more of my ire than Nintendo. Nintendo's just being Nintendo for me in putting out a console only worth owning for their franchises for the most part.
I bought it for stuff like Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Smash Bros etc. The hardcore Nintendo franchises. And also mainly because I bought into the motion control hype.
Now I'm back where I was with the GC--stuck with a console that will just have the 3-4 (or less) big Nintendo franchises a year I want to play, and the occasional third party game worth playing (i.e. Eternal Darkness, RE4). And it looks like it could be even worse this time with the focus on casual gamers reducing the overall number of "real" games.
I'm not really bitter at Nintendo, it's been since the SNES that one of their consoles could be the main system for a hardcore gamer as quality software has just been to few and far between since the N64. As such it's been necessary to own multiple consoles (had a N64 and PS1, a GC and a DC, X-box and PS2).
What I'm more pissed at is Sony for launching at $500-600 and MS for launching at $400 for the non-tard pack, having a ridiculouse failure rate, and only cutting price $50 nearly 2 years post-launch. In short, they've made it too expensive to own multiple consoles for this poor grad student, so they get more of my ire than Nintendo. Nintendo's just being Nintendo for me in putting out a console only worth owning for their franchises for the most part.
[quote name='Strell']
Why does every discussion about the Wii - outside of the threads that are following a game specifically - always end up mired in these same little circles?[/QUOTE]
It's just that these are the central issues currently about whether someone is happy with the Wii or not.
I love the Nintendo main franchises, but I hate the Wii hardware, hate that third party support has been so slow to come (would think at least third parties would be showing some 2008 stuff, but really nothing major yet) etc. etc.
I'm used to owning Nintendo consoles just to play Mario, Metroid and Zelda more or less, but it's harder this time since I haven't had the cash to buy something else to be my main console in the meantime and I made the mistake of buying into the launch hype (motion controls etc.) and buying it first. And I've never been able to bring myself to sell it yet as there's always been just enough right on the corner (i.e. Metroid and now Mario/Smash Bros) that were MUST plays for me to keep me from pulling the trigger.
So in between those big games it gathers dust and I'm back to, "
I have nothing to play, where are the third party games worth playing, it sucks that this isn't HD, motion controls have been damn hit or miss" etc. etc.
Thus the circular nature of these types of threads. These are the central issues in whether someone is happy or not with their Wii.
Why does every discussion about the Wii - outside of the threads that are following a game specifically - always end up mired in these same little circles?[/QUOTE]
It's just that these are the central issues currently about whether someone is happy with the Wii or not.
I love the Nintendo main franchises, but I hate the Wii hardware, hate that third party support has been so slow to come (would think at least third parties would be showing some 2008 stuff, but really nothing major yet) etc. etc.
I'm used to owning Nintendo consoles just to play Mario, Metroid and Zelda more or less, but it's harder this time since I haven't had the cash to buy something else to be my main console in the meantime and I made the mistake of buying into the launch hype (motion controls etc.) and buying it first. And I've never been able to bring myself to sell it yet as there's always been just enough right on the corner (i.e. Metroid and now Mario/Smash Bros) that were MUST plays for me to keep me from pulling the trigger.
So in between those big games it gathers dust and I'm back to, "
I have nothing to play, where are the third party games worth playing, it sucks that this isn't HD, motion controls have been damn hit or miss" etc. etc.Thus the circular nature of these types of threads. These are the central issues in whether someone is happy or not with their Wii.
[quote name='io']You are wrong there - Blue Dragon is excellent. .[/QUOTE]
I'd just say you're in the minority on that one. 77% on Game Rankings. http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/927950.asp
It's good in the old school JRPG vain, but not many of us have much interest in those types of games these days.
Hell, I loved FFIII on the SNES, but haven't been able to get into FFVI advanced at all as I can't stand not being able to explore dungeons because of all theing random battles.
An RPG has to have a quick pace and an engaging story to keep my interest these days. From the couple hours I played at my friends, and from reviews I read, Blue Dragon has neither of these.
I'd just say you're in the minority on that one. 77% on Game Rankings. http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/927950.asp
It's good in the old school JRPG vain, but not many of us have much interest in those types of games these days.
Hell, I loved FFIII on the SNES, but haven't been able to get into FFVI advanced at all as I can't stand not being able to explore dungeons because of all the
ing random battles.An RPG has to have a quick pace and an engaging story to keep my interest these days. From the couple hours I played at my friends, and from reviews I read, Blue Dragon has neither of these.
[quote name='mykevermin']Both are unique...[/QUOTE]
Heh. I find that funny in a "yeah, the SIXAXIS is unique just like the Wiimote" and in a semantics way.
[quote name='mykevermin']But, the argument here doesn't seem (to me, at any rate) to be about the number of crap titles. It's the lack of quality third party games out now, and on the horizon. The complaint here seems to be "hey, would you put out a little *less* shit, and allocate those resources to games that are of superior quality? We're not talking Nintendo caliber, but somewhere between Nintendo and Chicken Shoot." Which is rather reasonable, IMO.[/QUOTE]
That's exactly it, I think. To call the Wii out on quality control while ignoring the massive mountains of shovelware the PS2 had -- as Botticus pointed out, Ninjabread Man WAS a PS2 title -- is ludicrious, and that's exactly what that EGM acticle did. The point it missed was that the Wii is basically "manic depressive" -- any given game is either fantastic, or garbage. What the PS2 had and what the Wii is lacking is a wide category of "Meh, it's okay" games. That may not sound like an issue, until you realize how many gamers buy mediocre gamers that have some appeal to their personal preferences -- I'd rather play a "fine" SRPG than an excellent sports game, for example.
Heh. I find that funny in a "yeah, the SIXAXIS is unique just like the Wiimote" and in a semantics way.
[quote name='mykevermin']But, the argument here doesn't seem (to me, at any rate) to be about the number of crap titles. It's the lack of quality third party games out now, and on the horizon. The complaint here seems to be "hey, would you put out a little *less* shit, and allocate those resources to games that are of superior quality? We're not talking Nintendo caliber, but somewhere between Nintendo and Chicken Shoot." Which is rather reasonable, IMO.[/QUOTE]
That's exactly it, I think. To call the Wii out on quality control while ignoring the massive mountains of shovelware the PS2 had -- as Botticus pointed out, Ninjabread Man WAS a PS2 title -- is ludicrious, and that's exactly what that EGM acticle did. The point it missed was that the Wii is basically "manic depressive" -- any given game is either fantastic, or garbage. What the PS2 had and what the Wii is lacking is a wide category of "Meh, it's okay" games. That may not sound like an issue, until you realize how many gamers buy mediocre gamers that have some appeal to their personal preferences -- I'd rather play a "fine" SRPG than an excellent sports game, for example.
PawnTakesKing
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 3 (100%)
[quote name='evilmax17']I realize that different people have different "thirsts" when it comes to videogame playing, but how many games do you really need? The console's been on the market for roughly 10 months, and I could definitely find 10 games that are worth playing.
Is one good game per month ludicrously low or something? I don't know how people can expect a AAA title every week, it's just not feasible.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='dmaul1114']I bought it for stuff like Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Smash Bros etc. The hardcore Nintendo franchises. And also mainly because I bought into the motion control hype.
Now I'm back where I was with the GC--stuck with a console that will just have the 3-4 (or less) big Nintendo franchises a year I want to play, and the occasional third party game worth playing (i.e. Eternal Darkness, RE4). And it looks like it could be even worse this time with the focus on casual gamers reducing the overall number of "real" games.
I'm not really bitter at Nintendo, it's been since the SNES that one of their consoles could be the main system for a hardcore gamer as quality software has just been to few and far between since the N64. As such it's been necessary to own multiple consoles (had a N64 and PS1, a GC and a DC, X-box and PS2).
What I'm more pissed at is Sony for launching at $500-600 and MS for launching at $400 for the non-tard pack, having a ridiculouse failure rate, and only cutting price $50 nearly 2 years post-launch. In short, they've made it too expensive to own multiple consoles for this poor grad student, so they get more of my ire than Nintendo. Nintendo's just being Nintendo for me in putting out a console only worth owning for their franchises for the most part.[/QUOTE]
I couldn't really have said it better.
Is one good game per month ludicrously low or something? I don't know how people can expect a AAA title every week, it's just not feasible.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='dmaul1114']I bought it for stuff like Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Smash Bros etc. The hardcore Nintendo franchises. And also mainly because I bought into the motion control hype.
Now I'm back where I was with the GC--stuck with a console that will just have the 3-4 (or less) big Nintendo franchises a year I want to play, and the occasional third party game worth playing (i.e. Eternal Darkness, RE4). And it looks like it could be even worse this time with the focus on casual gamers reducing the overall number of "real" games.
I'm not really bitter at Nintendo, it's been since the SNES that one of their consoles could be the main system for a hardcore gamer as quality software has just been to few and far between since the N64. As such it's been necessary to own multiple consoles (had a N64 and PS1, a GC and a DC, X-box and PS2).
What I'm more pissed at is Sony for launching at $500-600 and MS for launching at $400 for the non-tard pack, having a ridiculouse failure rate, and only cutting price $50 nearly 2 years post-launch. In short, they've made it too expensive to own multiple consoles for this poor grad student, so they get more of my ire than Nintendo. Nintendo's just being Nintendo for me in putting out a console only worth owning for their franchises for the most part.[/QUOTE]
I couldn't really have said it better.
[quote name='The Crotch']Sonic and the Secret Rings? Excite Truck? Elebits? Monkey Ball? Rayman? Trauma Center? All these games averaged around 70%, as I recall...[/QUOTE]
I'd have to agree. It has a lot of "meh, it's ok" games. It's lacking in AAA games for me, which is what really matters to me as I seldom waste time or money on "meh" games. Rentals at most.
I'd have to agree. It has a lot of "meh, it's ok" games. It's lacking in AAA games for me, which is what really matters to me as I seldom waste time or money on "meh" games. Rentals at most.
SNAKE EYES EX
CAGiversary!
The Wii lineup to me is pretty much:
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Resident Evil 4
Wii Sports
By the end of the year you can add:
Zack and Wiki
Super Mario Galaxy
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Resident Evil 4
Wii Sports
By the end of the year you can add:
Zack and Wiki
Super Mario Galaxy
V
Virtua
Guest
This has been happening forever on Nintendo consoles. Man up, 3rd parties. Capcom managed to sell a million or so of a port of a game where the original still runs on the console, ubisoft sold a million or so of Red Steel and Raving Rabbids, so quit your bitchin, and when shit like carnival games or Madden doesn't sell, don't be surprised.
Nintendo owners traditionally just don't buy the same kind of garbage that other pop-gamers do like Need for Speed and Madden.
Nintendo owners traditionally just don't buy the same kind of garbage that other pop-gamers do like Need for Speed and Madden.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='jer7583']Nintendo owners traditionally just don't buy the same kind of garbage that other pop-gamers do like Need for Speed and Madden.[/QUOTE]
Oh, bullshit.
Oh, bullshit.
[quote name='Strell']
Why does every discussion about the Wii - outside of the threads that are following a game specifically - always end up mired in these same little circles?[/QUOTE]
I would guess the circles feel tired because you insist on pacing them.
[quote name='Strell']
I mean we're still hearing "this is just the Gamecube with motion."
[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's better to say that if we're making inaccurate statements, it's more inaccurate to state "this isn't the GC with motion" than the opposite. There is more GameCube in the Wii than there is some fantastical next-gen magic machine. The major difference in the consoles IMO isn't the interface or hardware, it's that the Wii is receiving the intelligent, focused marketing that was due the GC.
I'm not sure how to fit all that in the thread discussion of when quality third-party, Wii-exclusive titles are going to hit in large numbers. I just thought I'd play briefly in the level above discourse that you prefer to occupy.
Why does every discussion about the Wii - outside of the threads that are following a game specifically - always end up mired in these same little circles?[/QUOTE]
I would guess the circles feel tired because you insist on pacing them.
[quote name='Strell']
I mean we're still hearing "this is just the Gamecube with motion."
[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's better to say that if we're making inaccurate statements, it's more inaccurate to state "this isn't the GC with motion" than the opposite. There is more GameCube in the Wii than there is some fantastical next-gen magic machine. The major difference in the consoles IMO isn't the interface or hardware, it's that the Wii is receiving the intelligent, focused marketing that was due the GC.
I'm not sure how to fit all that in the thread discussion of when quality third-party, Wii-exclusive titles are going to hit in large numbers. I just thought I'd play briefly in the level above discourse that you prefer to occupy.
defiance_17
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 55 (100%)
[quote name='jer7583']
Nintendo owners traditionally just don't buy the same kind of garbage that other pop-gamers do like Need for Speed and Madden.[/QUOTE]
You're absolutely right. They buy garbage like Mario Party and anything with Donkey Kong in the title. That's like an Abercrombie vs. Hot Topic argument.
Nintendo owners traditionally just don't buy the same kind of garbage that other pop-gamers do like Need for Speed and Madden.[/QUOTE]
You're absolutely right. They buy garbage like Mario Party and anything with Donkey Kong in the title. That's like an Abercrombie vs. Hot Topic argument.
[quote name='mykevermin']Oh, bullshit.[/quote]
Apparently he has never looked at the used racks of GC games at any second hand store.
I was willing to give the Wii a chance, mostly because I haven't owned a GC since about 2004 and felt the need to be able to play some GC games. Wii sports is mildly fun for a while, I gave SPM a chance as well, and I am not really into it. The motion controls don't work for me. If I want to play a serious game with some level of skill involved, I don't want to be waving shit around the room - I prefer the little bit extra of exactness (pretty sure that is not even a word) of a normal controller.
I don't blame the third parties for not climbing aboard yet. You are being quite a bit naive if you dont at least understand why it's at least a little bit of an issue. Anything that has sold that many units that quickly, and with that much competition, has a fairly high likelyhood of a heavy drop off at some point. On top of that, Nintendo is mostly catering to the recreational gamers and non gamers - and now they make up a larger portion of the gaming market than ever before. The ultimate Nintendo fanboys don't dominate the gaming market as the internet forums would indicate. If I was creating games, would I avoid the Wii? No, but I can at least see why someone would.
Apparently he has never looked at the used racks of GC games at any second hand store.
I was willing to give the Wii a chance, mostly because I haven't owned a GC since about 2004 and felt the need to be able to play some GC games. Wii sports is mildly fun for a while, I gave SPM a chance as well, and I am not really into it. The motion controls don't work for me. If I want to play a serious game with some level of skill involved, I don't want to be waving shit around the room - I prefer the little bit extra of exactness (pretty sure that is not even a word) of a normal controller.
I don't blame the third parties for not climbing aboard yet. You are being quite a bit naive if you dont at least understand why it's at least a little bit of an issue. Anything that has sold that many units that quickly, and with that much competition, has a fairly high likelyhood of a heavy drop off at some point. On top of that, Nintendo is mostly catering to the recreational gamers and non gamers - and now they make up a larger portion of the gaming market than ever before. The ultimate Nintendo fanboys don't dominate the gaming market as the internet forums would indicate. If I was creating games, would I avoid the Wii? No, but I can at least see why someone would.
bigdaddy
Banned
[quote name='Snake2715']one, two, three, four, five, six. I count six. A bit pissed today are we?[/quote]
It's only a half dozen!
And I think this is the reason reason....
"I don't know what to do!!! The PS3 is supposed to be number one with it's graphics and specs I don't understand! What the are we suppose to do with a wiggle wand?!" -3rd Parties
Here's a hint, the Wii already has 5 million more than the PS3 and the same as the Xbox 360 in half the time. What console do these companies thing will take over? Do they think so many people will buy a 360 because of Halo 3? Are the waiting for the PS3 sales to increase once.......... ummm... a good game comes out?
Idiots. Can't they see if you are on Nintendo's side you make more money? if anything I think they should be bitching about real things like friend codes.
It's only a half dozen!
And I think this is the reason reason....
"I don't know what to do!!! The PS3 is supposed to be number one with it's graphics and specs I don't understand! What the
are we suppose to do with a wiggle wand?!" -3rd PartiesHere's a hint, the Wii already has 5 million more than the PS3 and the same as the Xbox 360 in half the time. What console do these companies thing will take over? Do they think so many people will buy a 360 because of Halo 3? Are the waiting for the PS3 sales to increase once.......... ummm... a good game comes out?
Idiots. Can't they see if you are on Nintendo's side you make more money? if anything I think they should be bitching about real things like friend codes.
blazemonkey
CAGiversary!
so far i havent played many good 3rd party games on the wii. the nintendo titles are far superior.
[quote name='The Crotch']Sonic and the Secret Rings? Excite Truck? Elebits? Monkey Ball? Rayman? Trauma Center? All these games averaged around 70%, as I recall...[/QUOTE]
Fair enough, with the caveats that a) that's not the huge list of forgettable "there's something for everyone" filler on Sony consoles, and that stuff makes up a huge portion of the market. How many Wild ARMS games have there been? Siphon Filter? And b) I think they're averaging around 70% because they're scoring 5's and 9's, not 7s across the board.
[quote name='dmaul1114']I'd have to agree. It has a lot of "meh, it's ok" games. It's lacking in AAA games for me, which is what really matters to me as I seldom waste time or money on "meh" games. Rentals at most.[/QUOTE]
I'm curious: if the Wii is lacking in AAA games in your opinion, do you think a 360 or a PS3 alone would be able to meet the standard of "AAA games per year" you expect?
Fair enough, with the caveats that a) that's not the huge list of forgettable "there's something for everyone" filler on Sony consoles, and that stuff makes up a huge portion of the market. How many Wild ARMS games have there been? Siphon Filter? And b) I think they're averaging around 70% because they're scoring 5's and 9's, not 7s across the board.
[quote name='dmaul1114']I'd have to agree. It has a lot of "meh, it's ok" games. It's lacking in AAA games for me, which is what really matters to me as I seldom waste time or money on "meh" games. Rentals at most.[/QUOTE]
I'm curious: if the Wii is lacking in AAA games in your opinion, do you think a 360 or a PS3 alone would be able to meet the standard of "AAA games per year" you expect?
You know, there's a good reason I haven't touched many games on the Wii. That's because it's flooded with awful 3rd party titles, as you guys have mentioned. It's not really because are thinking it's just a fad and all. It's primarily because we're getting fed up and bored with all the garbage that is available at the time being that isn't made by Nintendo for the Wii.
These developers need to realize that the Wii is no different from the DS in terms of popularity. Both suffered the same drought, which resulted in people claiming the DS was merely a fad.
If the damned developers would learn how to make someing quality games, we wouldn't have this problem. Instead, Wii's 3rd party market is being flooded with poorly brought over ports (EA, you're completely guilty for this shit) and titles make no sense as hell being console games (Chicken Shoot, as mentioned before).
Should Nintendo have to reinforce that Seal of Quality they brought up back when Tengen crapped all over the NES just to slap some sense into these developers?[/SIZE]
These developers need to realize that the Wii is no different from the DS in terms of popularity. Both suffered the same drought, which resulted in people claiming the DS was merely a fad.
If the damned developers would learn how to make some
ing quality games, we wouldn't have this problem. Instead, Wii's 3rd party market is being flooded with poorly brought over ports (EA, you're completely guilty for this shit) and titles make no sense as hell being console games (Chicken Shoot, as mentioned before).Should Nintendo have to reinforce that Seal of Quality they brought up back when Tengen crapped all over the NES just to slap some sense into these developers?[/SIZE]
There isn't a true "shortage" of Wii consoles...its actually genious marketing on the part of Nintendo.
If they wanted the Wii to be available any & every where it would be. From what I've been told it will be starting black Friday.
Anyway I can sort of see their point but whoever this game company is they must be scared as hell to develop anything ::rolls eyes::
By the way the only 3rd party game on Wii I've really enjoyed is Marble Mania--most beloved Wii game by stoners
If they wanted the Wii to be available any & every where it would be. From what I've been told it will be starting black Friday.
Anyway I can sort of see their point but whoever this game company is they must be scared as hell to develop anything ::rolls eyes::
By the way the only 3rd party game on Wii I've really enjoyed is Marble Mania--most beloved Wii game by stoners
[quote name='dmaul1114']I'd just say you're in the minority on that one. 77% on Game Rankings. http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/927950.asp
It's good in the old school JRPG vain, but not many of us have much interest in those types of games these days.
Hell, I loved FFIII on the SNES, but haven't been able to get into FFVI advanced at all as I can't stand not being able to explore dungeons because of all theing random battles.
An RPG has to have a quick pace and an engaging story to keep my interest these days. From the couple hours I played at my friends, and from reviews I read, Blue Dragon has neither of these.[/QUOTE]
Not to get too off topic here, but what can I say, the reviews are wrong. Golly gee... Also, if you played for a "couple hours" you would know there are no random battles in Blue Dragon. If you knew that, you were being disingenuous in bringing that up as a slam on old school JRPGs. Yes, it has some old school JRPG elements, but that ain't one of them. DragonQuest VIII got solid rewiews and it is pretty solidly old-school including the random battles. Just because it is an old school JRPG and YOU don't want to play such things doesn't mean it is a bad game. And unless you review it from that perpective (which is fine if you are up front about it) it doesn't deserve at least some of the scores it got. I'd say it isn't quite as good as DQ VIII, but it is solidly 8-9 range. And the "horrible" average (that supposedly puts me in the minority) you posted (which I've seen before, thanks) is pretty close to that, so actually that's not too bad considering the inherent bias towards the old-school type of game... I add a couple points for most RPGs and take a couple away for most shooters to get to my personal preferences.
Actually, though, this brings up my frustration with the 360 which is in a similar vein as the "casual games is killing the Wii" crowd. Both Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata seem to be getting very little support from the 360 owning U.S. masses. I expect the same next week for Katamari. That, to me, is very frustrating and I wish these things would do much better so I could get more of my own brand of "hard core" games released for it. But I know that isn't likely to happen, so I hope the Wii can fill in that part of my library. The 360 seems to be going for the casual sports/shooter/racing crowd and that be the death of gaming.
And to get *somewhat* back on topic, if we can start getting third party support in terms of games like Blue Dragon, Tales of Symphonia (already happening by the way), and DragonQuest VIII (we'll see - maybe after IX for the DS), I'll be very happy indeed with the Wii.
It's good in the old school JRPG vain, but not many of us have much interest in those types of games these days.
Hell, I loved FFIII on the SNES, but haven't been able to get into FFVI advanced at all as I can't stand not being able to explore dungeons because of all the
ing random battles.An RPG has to have a quick pace and an engaging story to keep my interest these days. From the couple hours I played at my friends, and from reviews I read, Blue Dragon has neither of these.[/QUOTE]
Not to get too off topic here, but what can I say, the reviews are wrong. Golly gee... Also, if you played for a "couple hours" you would know there are no random battles in Blue Dragon. If you knew that, you were being disingenuous in bringing that up as a slam on old school JRPGs. Yes, it has some old school JRPG elements, but that ain't one of them. DragonQuest VIII got solid rewiews and it is pretty solidly old-school including the random battles. Just because it is an old school JRPG and YOU don't want to play such things doesn't mean it is a bad game. And unless you review it from that perpective (which is fine if you are up front about it) it doesn't deserve at least some of the scores it got. I'd say it isn't quite as good as DQ VIII, but it is solidly 8-9 range. And the "horrible" average (that supposedly puts me in the minority) you posted (which I've seen before, thanks) is pretty close to that, so actually that's not too bad considering the inherent bias towards the old-school type of game... I add a couple points for most RPGs and take a couple away for most shooters to get to my personal preferences
.Actually, though, this brings up my frustration with the 360 which is in a similar vein as the "casual games is killing the Wii" crowd. Both Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata seem to be getting very little support from the 360 owning U.S. masses. I expect the same next week for Katamari. That, to me, is very frustrating and I wish these things would do much better so I could get more of my own brand of "hard core" games released for it. But I know that isn't likely to happen, so I hope the Wii can fill in that part of my library. The 360 seems to be going for the casual sports/shooter/racing crowd and that be the death of gaming
.And to get *somewhat* back on topic, if we can start getting third party support in terms of games like Blue Dragon, Tales of Symphonia (already happening by the way), and DragonQuest VIII (we'll see - maybe after IX for the DS), I'll be very happy indeed with the Wii.
[quote name='dmaul1114']An RPG has to have a quick pace and an engaging story to keep my interest these days.[/quote]
What you want is a Zelda type game. Not an RPG. RPGs are hardly "quick pace" so as to give the play more story to unfold as they progress.
What you want is a Zelda type game. Not an RPG. RPGs are hardly "quick pace" so as to give the play more story to unfold as they progress.
[quote name='Tsukento']What you want is a Zelda type game. Not an RPG. RPGs are hardly "quick pace" so as to give the play more story to unfold as they progress.[/QUOTE]
I hadn't thought of that - good point. Also, the story in Blue Dragon is fine. I have yet to be blown away by the story in ANY game, so I don't see how it fails in that respect :lol:. FWIW, the best RPG stories I have played are Suikoden V and Fire Emblem Path of Radiance. Note that there are a lot of big-time RPG's I have not played though...
I hadn't thought of that - good point. Also, the story in Blue Dragon is fine. I have yet to be blown away by the story in ANY game, so I don't see how it fails in that respect :lol:. FWIW, the best RPG stories I have played are Suikoden V and Fire Emblem Path of Radiance. Note that there are a lot of big-time RPG's I have not played though...
[quote name='evilmax17']I realize that different people have different "thirsts" when it comes to videogame playing, but how many games do you really need? The console's been on the market for roughly 10 months, and I could definitely find 10 games that are worth playing.
Is one good game per month ludicrously low or something? I don't know how people can expect a AAA title every week, it's just not feasible.[/quote]
where are you getting those 10 good games from? I've got Paper Mario, Zelda and Metroid along with Wii Sports thats 5 the rest really don't interest me that much. However I've got almost two dozen or more 360 titles that I enjoy or "have" enjoyed in the past its not fanboyism its just it has more titles and draws my interest. Its also much easier to play with friends and most the time that I'm gaming now I'm gaming with friends on live. Right now theres really not much of an experience simlar to that on the Wii I mean what would I play super mario strikers...its soccer it dosen't really interest me *shrugs*.
Is one good game per month ludicrously low or something? I don't know how people can expect a AAA title every week, it's just not feasible.[/quote]
where are you getting those 10 good games from? I've got Paper Mario, Zelda and Metroid along with Wii Sports thats 5 the rest really don't interest me that much. However I've got almost two dozen or more 360 titles that I enjoy or "have" enjoyed in the past its not fanboyism its just it has more titles and draws my interest. Its also much easier to play with friends and most the time that I'm gaming now I'm gaming with friends on live. Right now theres really not much of an experience simlar to that on the Wii I mean what would I play super mario strikers...its soccer it dosen't really interest me *shrugs*.
[quote name='io']Not to get too off topic here, but what can I say, the reviews are wrong. Golly gee... Also, if you played for a "couple hours" you would know there are no random battles in Blue Dragon. If you knew that, you were being disingenuous in bringing that up as a slam on old school JRPGs. Yes, it has some old school JRPG elements, but that ain't one of them. DragonQuest VIII got solid rewiews and it is pretty solidly old-school including the random battles. Just because it is an old school JRPG and YOU don't want to play such things doesn't mean it is a bad game. And unless you review it from that perpective (which is fine if you are up front about it) it doesn't deserve at least some of the scores it got. I'd say it isn't quite as good as DQ VIII, but it is solidly 8-9 range. And the "horrible" average (that supposedly puts me in the minority) you posted (which I've seen before, thanks) is pretty close to that, so actually that's not too bad considering the inherent bias towards the old-school type of game... I add a couple points for most RPGs and take a couple away for most shooters to get to my personal preferences .
Actually, though, this brings up my frustration with the 360 which is in a similar vein as the "casual games is killing the Wii" crowd. Both Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata seem to be getting very little support from the 360 owning U.S. masses. I expect the same next week for Katamari. That, to me, is very frustrating and I wish these things would do much better so I could get more of my own brand of "hard core" games released for it. But I know that isn't likely to happen, so I hope the Wii can fill in that part of my library. The 360 seems to be going for the casual sports/shooter/racing crowd and that be the death of gaming.
And to get *somewhat* back on topic, if we can start getting third party support in terms of games like Blue Dragon, Tales of Symphonia (already happening by the way), and DragonQuest VIII (we'll see - maybe after IX for the DS), I'll be very happy indeed with the Wii.[/quote]
I bought Eternal Sonata io , I plan on getting blue dragon as well eventually there are just so many games for me to buy this year I had to cut down :/.
.Actually, though, this brings up my frustration with the 360 which is in a similar vein as the "casual games is killing the Wii" crowd. Both Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata seem to be getting very little support from the 360 owning U.S. masses. I expect the same next week for Katamari. That, to me, is very frustrating and I wish these things would do much better so I could get more of my own brand of "hard core" games released for it. But I know that isn't likely to happen, so I hope the Wii can fill in that part of my library. The 360 seems to be going for the casual sports/shooter/racing crowd and that be the death of gaming
.And to get *somewhat* back on topic, if we can start getting third party support in terms of games like Blue Dragon, Tales of Symphonia (already happening by the way), and DragonQuest VIII (we'll see - maybe after IX for the DS), I'll be very happy indeed with the Wii.[/quote]
I bought Eternal Sonata io , I plan on getting blue dragon as well eventually there are just so many games for me to buy this year I had to cut down :/.
Mookyjooky
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 42 (100%)
Lets all just realize that when you make a game for a nintendo system, your biggest competitor IS nintendo. And they have a serious advantage, because simply... its their system.
Lets also keep in mind, that Nintendo doesnt have to make a good game for it to sell a million copies either. In fact, decent number of their collection gets mediocre scores... Mario Party, Mario Sports games, etc...
Nintendo is a juggernaut in the gaming industry, and hell they got grandma to play games. But Nintendo kinda did this to themselves. In the past they always set the standard for brilliant, innovative games... but lately stuff like Wii Sports, Wii Play, Donkey Kong Barrel Blast... it all is pretty... bland. You cant say Resident evil 4 sucks cause its a port, when Zelda and Super Paper Mario were as well. And even though Zelda and Super Paper Mario are fantastic games, they really didnt require Wii interactivity, or used to innovative control scheme primarily. (Meaning not there, or not tacked on as an after thought)
Nintendo was getting there, they were on the right track at launch, but they're ALWAYS on the right track at launch, because they're a fantastic company and they have a VERY loyal fanbase. But like every system Nintendo has released since the Super Nes... they tend to stray to make the highest profit, and then drop the product for the next trend, leaving 3rd party in the wake. Also, innovation takes time to impliment, and Nintendo has years before their 3rd party does to get used to their innovation. Nintendo hasnt really been really good about support for their 3rd party companies as well.
In all honesty, why would a company spend millions in development for a system casual gamers bought to play Wii Tennis? Nintendo makes their money in the hardware, not in entising 3rd party software vendors to make fantastic games for their system.
Lets also keep in mind, that Nintendo doesnt have to make a good game for it to sell a million copies either. In fact, decent number of their collection gets mediocre scores... Mario Party, Mario Sports games, etc...
Nintendo is a juggernaut in the gaming industry, and hell they got grandma to play games. But Nintendo kinda did this to themselves. In the past they always set the standard for brilliant, innovative games... but lately stuff like Wii Sports, Wii Play, Donkey Kong Barrel Blast... it all is pretty... bland. You cant say Resident evil 4 sucks cause its a port, when Zelda and Super Paper Mario were as well. And even though Zelda and Super Paper Mario are fantastic games, they really didnt require Wii interactivity, or used to innovative control scheme primarily. (Meaning not there, or not tacked on as an after thought)
Nintendo was getting there, they were on the right track at launch, but they're ALWAYS on the right track at launch, because they're a fantastic company and they have a VERY loyal fanbase. But like every system Nintendo has released since the Super Nes... they tend to stray to make the highest profit, and then drop the product for the next trend, leaving 3rd party in the wake. Also, innovation takes time to impliment, and Nintendo has years before their 3rd party does to get used to their innovation. Nintendo hasnt really been really good about support for their 3rd party companies as well.
In all honesty, why would a company spend millions in development for a system casual gamers bought to play Wii Tennis? Nintendo makes their money in the hardware, not in entising 3rd party software vendors to make fantastic games for their system.
[quote name='Tsukento']
Should Nintendo have to reinforce that Seal of Quality they brought up back when Tengen crapped all over the NES just to slap some sense into these developers?[/size][/quote]
Uhh, what?
The Nintendo 'seal of quality' *snicker*, was around before Tengen. Hell, Tengen used to make game with that seal on them, games with normal grey NES carts. It wasnt until the Tetris dispute that Tengen went all renegade on Nintendo. And the Tengen version of Tetris is better than Nintendos version. Tengen games in general are among the better NES games.
The Nintendo 'Seal of Quality' is an effing joke. All that seal ever meant was that the publisher of the game with the seal on it paid Nintendo a licensing fee. There have been tons of third party crap games on Nintendo systems since the beginning, and it seems there always will be.
Should Nintendo have to reinforce that Seal of Quality they brought up back when Tengen crapped all over the NES just to slap some sense into these developers?[/size][/quote]
Uhh, what?
The Nintendo 'seal of quality' *snicker*, was around before Tengen. Hell, Tengen used to make game with that seal on them, games with normal grey NES carts. It wasnt until the Tetris dispute that Tengen went all renegade on Nintendo. And the Tengen version of Tetris is better than Nintendos version. Tengen games in general are among the better NES games.
The Nintendo 'Seal of Quality' is an effing joke. All that seal ever meant was that the publisher of the game with the seal on it paid Nintendo a licensing fee. There have been tons of third party crap games on Nintendo systems since the beginning, and it seems there always will be.
[quote name='jkam']Will this shit ever end? Yeah Nintendo makes some good games...here's an idea, make good games like Nintendo and your games will sell.[/QUOTE]
No, no they won't. RE1, RE4, and some Sonic games are the only 3rd party games that sold as well as Gamecube games published by Nintendo. Are you telling me these are the only good 3rd party games?
No, no they won't. RE1, RE4, and some Sonic games are the only 3rd party games that sold as well as Gamecube games published by Nintendo. Are you telling me these are the only good 3rd party games?
[quote name='dothog']I would guess the circles feel tired because you insist on pacing them.[/quote]
Phuh. That is a bad statement, even for this thread.
There is no way you could have marketed the GC like the Wii. Absolutely no way.
There's not enough alcohol in the universe to put me in a state where I'd care to respond to this.
[quote name='pete5883']No, no they won't. RE1, RE4, and some Sonic games are the only 3rd party games that sold as well as Gamecube games published by Nintendo. Are you telling me these are the only good 3rd party games?[/QUOTE]
Soul Calibur 2 sold well. I want to say Viewtiful Joe 1 did also, but I can't guarantee that.
But again. Comparing the GC to the Wii at this point is tenuous at best.
Phuh. That is a bad statement, even for this thread.
There is no way you could have marketed the GC like the Wii. Absolutely no way.
There's not enough alcohol in the universe to put me in a state where I'd care to respond to this.
[quote name='pete5883']No, no they won't. RE1, RE4, and some Sonic games are the only 3rd party games that sold as well as Gamecube games published by Nintendo. Are you telling me these are the only good 3rd party games?[/QUOTE]
Soul Calibur 2 sold well. I want to say Viewtiful Joe 1 did also, but I can't guarantee that.
But again. Comparing the GC to the Wii at this point is tenuous at best.
[quote name='Tsukento']What you want is a Zelda type game. Not an RPG. RPGs are hardly "quick pace" so as to give the play more story to unfold as they progress.[/QUOTE]
Final Fantasy X was very quick paced, XII looks even more so but I've not given it ago yet. Knights of the Old Republic is very quick paced, Mass Effect looks even more so with real time battles etc.
By quick paced, I really just meant more action oriented, no random encounters hampering exploration (and, IO for your post above, yes I know Blue Dragon doesn't have them, that just got lumped in there with my general rant against old JRPG style games), and more action oriented battles.
Final Fantasy X was very quick paced, XII looks even more so but I've not given it ago yet. Knights of the Old Republic is very quick paced, Mass Effect looks even more so with real time battles etc.
By quick paced, I really just meant more action oriented, no random encounters hampering exploration (and, IO for your post above, yes I know Blue Dragon doesn't have them, that just got lumped in there with my general rant against old JRPG style games), and more action oriented battles.
[quote name='dmaul1114']
What I'm more pissed at is Sony for launching at $500-600 and MS for launching at $400 for the non-tard pack, having a ridiculouse failure rate, and only cutting price $50 nearly 2 years post-launch. In short, they've made it too expensive to own multiple consoles for this poor grad student, so they get more of my ire than Nintendo. Nintendo's just being Nintendo for me in putting out a console only worth owning for their franchises for the most part.[/QUOTE]
Well that problem is solved. Couldn't pass up the offer from Frys in the deal forum for a Pro 360 w/HDMI, Marvel:UA, Forza 2, Orange Box, Bioshock and Two Worlds for $399.99. Three $60 games for $50? That's a smokin' deal. Especially when Bioshock and Orange Box were among my most wanted 360 games.
Well, problem solved pending the orders not being canceled. But I've never had that problem with Frys.com
What I'm more pissed at is Sony for launching at $500-600 and MS for launching at $400 for the non-tard pack, having a ridiculouse failure rate, and only cutting price $50 nearly 2 years post-launch. In short, they've made it too expensive to own multiple consoles for this poor grad student, so they get more of my ire than Nintendo. Nintendo's just being Nintendo for me in putting out a console only worth owning for their franchises for the most part.[/QUOTE]
Well that problem is solved. Couldn't pass up the offer from Frys in the deal forum for a Pro 360 w/HDMI, Marvel:UA, Forza 2, Orange Box, Bioshock and Two Worlds for $399.99. Three $60 games for $50? That's a smokin' deal. Especially when Bioshock and Orange Box were among my most wanted 360 games.
Well, problem solved pending the orders not being canceled. But I've never had that problem with Frys.com
[quote name='Strell']There is no way you could have marketed the GC like the Wii. Absolutely no way.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly. And that marketing is the major difference in the consoles, not the hardware, etc., hence labeling the Wii a "GC with motion control" is fair enough from a hardware perspective. A touch too simple for some tastes, but not so misleading as to be offensive. If you're suggesting that the GC was screwed out of the gate because it lacked a hook (such as motion control and/or targeting non-gamers aka blue ocean) and was consequently impossible to market as aggressively as the Wii, I disagree. It was a different Nintendo then, and they wasted the GC opportunity.
[quote name='Strell']
There's not enough alcohol in the universe to put me in a state where I'd care to respond to this.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I hope you didn't take offense to the comment. At least to the extent that you need to be drunk to respond openly. It's just that this meta-discourse is what you enjoy, whether it's dismissing thread discussion on the basis of other, older threads (as though all threads are part of one continuous discussion) or commenting on the appropriateness of changing thread titles. Sometimes it's helpful, but other times it's there for its own sake.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly. And that marketing is the major difference in the consoles, not the hardware, etc., hence labeling the Wii a "GC with motion control" is fair enough from a hardware perspective. A touch too simple for some tastes, but not so misleading as to be offensive. If you're suggesting that the GC was screwed out of the gate because it lacked a hook (such as motion control and/or targeting non-gamers aka blue ocean) and was consequently impossible to market as aggressively as the Wii, I disagree. It was a different Nintendo then, and they wasted the GC opportunity.
[quote name='Strell']
There's not enough alcohol in the universe to put me in a state where I'd care to respond to this.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I hope you didn't take offense to the comment. At least to the extent that you need to be drunk to respond openly. It's just that this meta-discourse is what you enjoy, whether it's dismissing thread discussion on the basis of other, older threads (as though all threads are part of one continuous discussion) or commenting on the appropriateness of changing thread titles. Sometimes it's helpful, but other times it's there for its own sake.
[quote name='pete5883']No, no they won't. RE1, RE4, and some Sonic games are the only 3rd party games that sold as well as Gamecube games published by Nintendo. Are you telling me these are the only good 3rd party games?[/QUOTE]
No but there was almost a stigma that the Cube's third party games weren't as good. The truth was that some looked better and loaded faster than there PS2 counterparts. I was among the few that had and still have some of the third party stuff on the GC as opposed to the PS2. The games were there, but when it came down to it the install base just wasn't there. Common sense would also tell me with the vast difference in system sales that more people only owned a PS2 than only owned a GC which would create the major difference in profitably on the PS2.
The difference here as of right now the Wii is the market leader where as the Gamcube was in last place. The sad thing is the Cube's 3rd party games were better than the Wii's at this point since it was a more level playing field with each of the 3 systems so everyone got essential the same game. Now we have games that aren't being made specifically for the Wii at all and its become a dumping ground of garbage.
No but there was almost a stigma that the Cube's third party games weren't as good. The truth was that some looked better and loaded faster than there PS2 counterparts. I was among the few that had and still have some of the third party stuff on the GC as opposed to the PS2. The games were there, but when it came down to it the install base just wasn't there. Common sense would also tell me with the vast difference in system sales that more people only owned a PS2 than only owned a GC which would create the major difference in profitably on the PS2.
The difference here as of right now the Wii is the market leader where as the Gamcube was in last place. The sad thing is the Cube's 3rd party games were better than the Wii's at this point since it was a more level playing field with each of the 3 systems so everyone got essential the same game. Now we have games that aren't being made specifically for the Wii at all and its become a dumping ground of garbage.
dosesn't every system to a point become dumping ground? I understand its easier on the Wii due to lower development costs but they need to realize to it takes more to make a port work on a system thats designed on motion sensing controls rather than analog or dpad control. I half wonder if their just pumping out budget games at AAA game prices to offset development costs for systems such as the 360 and PS3 (which would be stupid but *shrug* who knows).
I couldn't care less if a system is a "dumping ground." The DS is a huge dumping ground, but it has a ton of great software as well.
As long as a system has enough AAA games I want to play to warrant owning it, I'm fine and see no point in caring how much shovelware is also out there. The problem with the Wii is it hasn't had enough AAA games to satisfy me thus far.
The shovelware doesn't bother me, as most of it is from developer who have never made a game I loved anyway (Ubisoft being a big exception to this). i.e., they aren't wasting time that could be put into something I'd like anyway.
As long as a system has enough AAA games I want to play to warrant owning it, I'm fine and see no point in caring how much shovelware is also out there. The problem with the Wii is it hasn't had enough AAA games to satisfy me thus far.
The shovelware doesn't bother me, as most of it is from developer who have never made a game I loved anyway (Ubisoft being a big exception to this). i.e., they aren't wasting time that could be put into something I'd like anyway.
[quote name='dmaul1114']Well that problem is solved. Couldn't pass up the offer from Frys in the deal forum for a Pro 360 w/HDMI, Marvel:UA, Forza 2, Orange Box, Bioshock and Two Worlds for $399.99. Three $60 games for $50? That's a smokin' deal. Especially when Bioshock and Orange Box were among my most wanted 360 games.
[/QUOTE]
Well, holy crap, that is a great deal. I feel ripped off paying $480 for an Elite with no games. And that makes me mad at MS. See, at least Nintendo stuff holds its value . But this strengthens my resolve on not buying a PS3 any time soon - I'll wait for some similar type bundle.
[/QUOTE]
Well, holy crap, that is a great deal. I feel ripped off paying $480 for an Elite with no games
. And that makes me mad at MS. See, at least Nintendo stuff holds its value . But this strengthens my resolve on not buying a PS3 any time soon - I'll wait for some similar type bundle.
bread's done