Quality Wii game overload!
- Thread starter saadman
- Start date
moothemagiccow
CAG Newbie
really? i havent seen them. then again i hate FPSes and I think uncharted sucks
horses for courses really
horses for courses really
[quote name='Wolfpup']I totally disagree with that. Both current gen consoles had their typical ridiculous overload of awesome games. I don't even see how that's debatable, save for some individual genres perhaps (they've been light on platformers for example).[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's just me, but even a new Need for Speed and Gran Turismo release don't make me want a PS3... and those are two series I would almost have killed for. Let's see: a new Call of Duty... boring. A new Halo... couldn't care less. GT5 and NFS are cool, but not enough to get a new console over. There's maybe a dozen PS3 games I would want. It's about the same for the 360, if not less.
Now, take that, and compare it to the fact that I bought 50 Wii games since I got the console May 28. It's nearly 9 games a month. Granted, a bit of those aren't new releases, but a dozen of them are 2010 releases, at the very least.
Maybe it's just me, but even a new Need for Speed and Gran Turismo release don't make me want a PS3... and those are two series I would almost have killed for. Let's see: a new Call of Duty... boring. A new Halo... couldn't care less. GT5 and NFS are cool, but not enough to get a new console over. There's maybe a dozen PS3 games I would want. It's about the same for the 360, if not less.
Now, take that, and compare it to the fact that I bought 50 Wii games since I got the console May 28. It's nearly 9 games a month. Granted, a bit of those aren't new releases, but a dozen of them are 2010 releases, at the very least.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wolfpup
CAGiversary!
Uncharted 2 didn't even come out this year, and is incredibly well reviewed. And come on, you know perfectly well the current gen systems have both more real games than the Wii does (as good as it's gotten the last couple years) and almost more than it's possible for anyone to really even play.
My attempt at a relatively unbiased list scanning through IGN's reviews:
Current gen systems:
Majin and the Forsaken Kingdom
(NBA Jam, but what I assume is a nearly as good version is on the Wii)
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood
CODBLOPS
Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit
Dance Central (well, it reviewed highly, so...)
The Force Unleashed 2
Fable 3
Fallout: New Vegas
Vanquish
Medal of Honor
Gothic 4
Enslaved
Dead Rising 2
Caslevania: Lords of Shadow
Battlefield Bad Company 2
Halo Reach
Spider-Man: Shattered Diminsions
R.U.S.E.
Mafia 2
Kane & Lynce 2
BlazeBlue: Continuum Shift
Singularity
Transformers: War for Cybertron
Alpha Protocol
Blur
Red Dead Redemption (and the zombie version thereof)
Split/Second
Nier
Skate 3
Lost Planet 2
Record of Agarest War
Alan Wake
Sherlock Homes versus Jack the Ripper
Super Street Fighter 4
Splinter Cell Conviction
Just Cause 2
Resonance of Fate
Supreme Commander 2
Metro 2033
Resident Evil 5 Gold
Dynasty Warriors Strikeforce (well, it got an 8, surprisingly)
Dragon Age Origins Awakening
Final Fantasy 13
Risen
Deadly Premonition
Tropico 3
Mass Effect 2
Bioshock 2
Dante's Inferno
Dark Void
Army of Two Two
Darksiders (I didn't like it, but...)
3D Dot Game Heroes
God of War 3
Heavy Rain
Modnation Racers
Gran Turismo 5
The Sly Collection
Yakuza 3
Versus the Wii:
Pictionary (hey, I'm counting it-Pictionary could be a fun game
Epic Mickey
Super Mario Bros. All Stars
Donkey Kong Country
Sonic Colors
GoldenEye
Just Dance 2 (yeah, I'll count this too)
Krby's Epic Yarn
NBA Jam...I'll count it on this list just because it did come out first, and originally was going to be the only platform, although it wouldn't make sense to buy it here now)
Batman: The Brave and the Bold
Ivy the Kiwi
Guilty Party
Metroid: Other M
Tetris Party Deluxe (well, it reviews well so...)
Sin and Punishment 2 (I hated it, but...)
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Monster Hunter Tri
Red Steel 2
Fragile Dreams
Tatsunoku
No More Heroes 2
Now frankly that's a solid list too, but there's no way it's objectively "a hell of a lot better" than the current gen systems, and it's ignoring sports games and some others where there'd be no reason to buy the last gen version. (Heck, all the games on this list are only on it because they're exclusives...but that counts since if Wii's the only place to play them, it's the only place to play them.)
My attempt at a relatively unbiased list scanning through IGN's reviews:
Current gen systems:
Majin and the Forsaken Kingdom
(NBA Jam, but what I assume is a nearly as good version is on the Wii)
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood
CODBLOPS
Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit
Dance Central (well, it reviewed highly, so...)
The Force Unleashed 2
Fable 3
Fallout: New Vegas
Vanquish
Medal of Honor
Gothic 4
Enslaved
Dead Rising 2
Caslevania: Lords of Shadow
Battlefield Bad Company 2
Halo Reach
Spider-Man: Shattered Diminsions
R.U.S.E.
Mafia 2
Kane & Lynce 2
BlazeBlue: Continuum Shift
Singularity
Transformers: War for Cybertron
Alpha Protocol
Blur
Red Dead Redemption (and the zombie version thereof)
Split/Second
Nier
Skate 3
Lost Planet 2
Record of Agarest War
Alan Wake
Sherlock Homes versus Jack the Ripper
Super Street Fighter 4
Splinter Cell Conviction
Just Cause 2
Resonance of Fate
Supreme Commander 2
Metro 2033
Resident Evil 5 Gold
Dynasty Warriors Strikeforce (well, it got an 8, surprisingly)
Dragon Age Origins Awakening
Final Fantasy 13
Risen
Deadly Premonition
Tropico 3
Mass Effect 2
Bioshock 2
Dante's Inferno
Dark Void
Army of Two Two
Darksiders (I didn't like it, but...)
3D Dot Game Heroes
God of War 3
Heavy Rain
Modnation Racers
Gran Turismo 5
The Sly Collection
Yakuza 3
Versus the Wii:
Pictionary (hey, I'm counting it-Pictionary could be a fun game
Epic Mickey
Super Mario Bros. All Stars
Donkey Kong Country
Sonic Colors
GoldenEye
Just Dance 2 (yeah, I'll count this too)
Krby's Epic Yarn
NBA Jam...I'll count it on this list just because it did come out first, and originally was going to be the only platform, although it wouldn't make sense to buy it here now)
Batman: The Brave and the Bold
Ivy the Kiwi
Guilty Party
Metroid: Other M
Tetris Party Deluxe (well, it reviews well so...)
Sin and Punishment 2 (I hated it, but...)
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Monster Hunter Tri
Red Steel 2
Fragile Dreams
Tatsunoku
No More Heroes 2
Now frankly that's a solid list too, but there's no way it's objectively "a hell of a lot better" than the current gen systems, and it's ignoring sports games and some others where there'd be no reason to buy the last gen version. (Heck, all the games on this list are only on it because they're exclusives...but that counts since if Wii's the only place to play them, it's the only place to play them.)
Maybe it's me, but of the ones that you posted for the PS3/360, I couldn't care less about playing all but maybe 10 of them.
I'm a weird person, but I don't care about Call of Duty, Fallout, Halo, well, any FPS really. I don't get the hype over games that are released and are essentially the same game with a slightly modified story or setting. If I were buying a PS3, I'd get it for 3D Dot Game Heroes, Majin, Blur, Split/Second, and maybe Dragon's Age. The rest of them I really couldn't care about (except like I said NFS and GT are games I'd normally kill over... maybe not having the system is a reason behind my not caring).
It's also quite possible that much of my lack of caring is that a lot of games on the PS3 or 360 use online play as an integral part of 'enjoying' the game. I'm not going to pay extra to play online nor do I even have that option much of the year (no wireless in my dorm, and only allowed 1 ethernet connection at a time, so it's either my computer or anything else).
I'll also just add this: if you had to look up what games are supposedly good for a system, your argument holds little value. If someone asks me what Wii games I'd suggest they play, I could rattle off a list of 20-25 no problem. You admitted to having to look up the list for PS3/360.
I'm a weird person, but I don't care about Call of Duty, Fallout, Halo, well, any FPS really. I don't get the hype over games that are released and are essentially the same game with a slightly modified story or setting. If I were buying a PS3, I'd get it for 3D Dot Game Heroes, Majin, Blur, Split/Second, and maybe Dragon's Age. The rest of them I really couldn't care about (except like I said NFS and GT are games I'd normally kill over... maybe not having the system is a reason behind my not caring).
It's also quite possible that much of my lack of caring is that a lot of games on the PS3 or 360 use online play as an integral part of 'enjoying' the game. I'm not going to pay extra to play online nor do I even have that option much of the year (no wireless in my dorm, and only allowed 1 ethernet connection at a time, so it's either my computer or anything else).
I'll also just add this: if you had to look up what games are supposedly good for a system, your argument holds little value. If someone asks me what Wii games I'd suggest they play, I could rattle off a list of 20-25 no problem. You admitted to having to look up the list for PS3/360.
Wolfpup
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Altanis']
It's also quite possible that much of my lack of caring is that a lot of games on the PS3 or 360 use online play as an integral part of 'enjoying' the game.[/quote]
I basically never play online stuff, and aside from a small number of games that wouldn't be an issue-Left 4 Dead would be one of the few games in that category on consoles.
You misunderstand. I could easily do that for the current gen systems (and maybe the Wii, not sure, though I could certainly name a decent number for it too). I consulted a list since the issue at hand was specifically games released this year, and I wasn't trying to only list things I care about, but to do a more general list of things that might legitimately interest core gamers.
It's also quite possible that much of my lack of caring is that a lot of games on the PS3 or 360 use online play as an integral part of 'enjoying' the game.[/quote]
I basically never play online stuff, and aside from a small number of games that wouldn't be an issue-Left 4 Dead would be one of the few games in that category on consoles.
You misunderstand. I could easily do that for the current gen systems (and maybe the Wii, not sure, though I could certainly name a decent number for it too). I consulted a list since the issue at hand was specifically games released this year, and I wasn't trying to only list things I care about, but to do a more general list of things that might legitimately interest core gamers.
[quote name='Altanis']Maybe it's just me...[/QUOTE]
Yup, just you.
[quote name='Altanis']
Now, take that, and compare it to the fact that I bought 50 Wii games since I got the console May 28. It's nearly 9 games a month. Granted, a bit of those aren't new releases, but a dozen of them are 2010 releases, at the very least.[/QUOTE]
You actually found 50 really good games released since 2006?
(Even with double checking how many I own, as shown below I know some of those I bought on good word of mouth, I still have doubts about after playing them for a bit when I got them as to their overall quality, or appeal to me, even after watching vids, and reading reviews on many of them I'm still undecided on even after buying them)
I spent a few days this past summer looking up hidden gems, underrated games, top 25 games on the Wii and then researched what I didn't have and honestly I'm still not at 50 games for the system (I think it was 43 last count...just checked, I own 55, really 57, but I don't count Sports and Sports Resort, never even opened'em, played or seen them before elsewhere, could live without'em)
So I have just a tick over 50 now and I've been buying for a few years. Mario Galaxy is coming this week sometime, but still, I was thinking that I didn't think I'd have as many Wii games as I have GC games this time around. And I wasn't nearly as picky on what I bought for that system (which is why I regret a lot of buys for it) The point being, I have every AAA title, trickling down to low A level quality on the system and some that might be considered high B or 80-85% quality, if you'd rather see it in numerical format.
Still....
As I pointed out in my last post, there was a drought after MG2, if you can argue otherwise, please do, then they shot their load here this holiday season and left only Zelda to back'em up into next year. A lot of their heavy hitters disappointed a lot of people, not saying the other systems didn't have that happen as well, but I can say I've bought at least a ratio of 2-1 if not 3-1 games for my PS3 compared to the Wii, and it doesn't have to do with preference, more like lack of quality during the entire year.
At the moment I can name 1, count'em 1 big name release confirmed for US release. Zelda. If Xenoblade and Last Story come out even better, otherwise I'm looking forward to Lost in Shadow as well, but it's not on everyone's radar. But I can name at least half a dozen PS3 games I'm looking forward too, that's not to brag, that's just saying that so far the "other" systems are already loading up for a big year.
I'm looking realistically at it, I'm not keeping the blinders on and treating $#!**^ games as something great just because they're on the Wii. Which is the feeling I'm getting from some of the more "expressive" members on this board. (Please note, I'm not counting multi-platform (Wii vs the others, more like games on the Wii and not found on the other systems) releases anywhere in my accounting.
I'm hoping for another good two years out of the system before the successor is announced and 3rd party support doesn't totally fizzle out like it has done since the N64, when the system gets on its last legs before its DOA.
Anyway, need to quit readin' this thread, posts are takin' too long.
[quote name='Altanis']Maybe it's me, but of the ones that you posted for the PS3/360, I couldn't care less about playing all but maybe 10 of them. I'm a weird person...[/QUOTE]
See my comment above, maybe I shouldn't be debating this with you...
[quote name='Altanis']
... maybe not having the system is a reason behind my not caring).
[/QUOTE]
Again...you think?
[quote name='Altanis']
I'll also just add this: if you had to look up what games are supposedly good for a system, your argument holds little value. If someone asks me what Wii games I'd suggest they play, I could rattle off a list of 20-25 no problem. You admitted to having to look up the list for PS3/360.[/QUOTE]
Now here I have an issue that is separate from the current debate, I applaud him for doing his homework and caring enough to present evidence to back up what he was trying to prove instead of just being obstinate or ignorant and say something like "Just cause it sucks" and leave it at that.
And I think you owe him at least that amount of common courtesy for going through the trouble to compile a list (a good list) that fairly represents all the systems in a good light. I'm done cause this last paragraph you wrote, seriously just reeks of something.
Good job on the lists Wolfpup, nice to see someone be able to make their case in a debate in this day and age and not be rude, condescending, and make an effort to prove their point. Cheers.
Yup, just you.
[quote name='Altanis']
Now, take that, and compare it to the fact that I bought 50 Wii games since I got the console May 28. It's nearly 9 games a month. Granted, a bit of those aren't new releases, but a dozen of them are 2010 releases, at the very least.[/QUOTE]
You actually found 50 really good games released since 2006?
(Even with double checking how many I own, as shown below I know some of those I bought on good word of mouth, I still have doubts about after playing them for a bit when I got them as to their overall quality, or appeal to me, even after watching vids, and reading reviews on many of them I'm still undecided on even after buying them)
I spent a few days this past summer looking up hidden gems, underrated games, top 25 games on the Wii and then researched what I didn't have and honestly I'm still not at 50 games for the system (I think it was 43 last count...just checked, I own 55, really 57, but I don't count Sports and Sports Resort, never even opened'em, played or seen them before elsewhere, could live without'em)
So I have just a tick over 50 now and I've been buying for a few years. Mario Galaxy is coming this week sometime, but still, I was thinking that I didn't think I'd have as many Wii games as I have GC games this time around. And I wasn't nearly as picky on what I bought for that system (which is why I regret a lot of buys for it) The point being, I have every AAA title, trickling down to low A level quality on the system and some that might be considered high B or 80-85% quality, if you'd rather see it in numerical format.
Still....
As I pointed out in my last post, there was a drought after MG2, if you can argue otherwise, please do, then they shot their load here this holiday season and left only Zelda to back'em up into next year. A lot of their heavy hitters disappointed a lot of people, not saying the other systems didn't have that happen as well, but I can say I've bought at least a ratio of 2-1 if not 3-1 games for my PS3 compared to the Wii, and it doesn't have to do with preference, more like lack of quality during the entire year.
At the moment I can name 1, count'em 1 big name release confirmed for US release. Zelda. If Xenoblade and Last Story come out even better, otherwise I'm looking forward to Lost in Shadow as well, but it's not on everyone's radar. But I can name at least half a dozen PS3 games I'm looking forward too, that's not to brag, that's just saying that so far the "other" systems are already loading up for a big year.
I'm looking realistically at it, I'm not keeping the blinders on and treating $#!**^ games as something great just because they're on the Wii. Which is the feeling I'm getting from some of the more "expressive" members on this board. (Please note, I'm not counting multi-platform (Wii vs the others, more like games on the Wii and not found on the other systems) releases anywhere in my accounting.
I'm hoping for another good two years out of the system before the successor is announced and 3rd party support doesn't totally fizzle out like it has done since the N64, when the system gets on its last legs before its DOA.
Anyway, need to quit readin' this thread, posts are takin' too long.
[quote name='Altanis']Maybe it's me, but of the ones that you posted for the PS3/360, I couldn't care less about playing all but maybe 10 of them. I'm a weird person...[/QUOTE]
See my comment above, maybe I shouldn't be debating this with you...
[quote name='Altanis']
... maybe not having the system is a reason behind my not caring).
[/QUOTE]
Again...you think?
[quote name='Altanis']
I'll also just add this: if you had to look up what games are supposedly good for a system, your argument holds little value. If someone asks me what Wii games I'd suggest they play, I could rattle off a list of 20-25 no problem. You admitted to having to look up the list for PS3/360.[/QUOTE]
Now here I have an issue that is separate from the current debate, I applaud him for doing his homework and caring enough to present evidence to back up what he was trying to prove instead of just being obstinate or ignorant and say something like "Just cause it sucks" and leave it at that.
And I think you owe him at least that amount of common courtesy for going through the trouble to compile a list (a good list) that fairly represents all the systems in a good light. I'm done cause this last paragraph you wrote, seriously just reeks of something.
Good job on the lists Wolfpup, nice to see someone be able to make their case in a debate in this day and age and not be rude, condescending, and make an effort to prove their point. Cheers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, actually, I did find 50 good games for the Wii. It's not like I just buy any game and call it good. None of the games I own (with the possible exception of maybe a couple) are bad.
I have never once said that the PS3 or 360 "just sucks" as you are trying to say I have. I simply said that a lot of the games he listed as being the best games on those consoles I couldn't care about. Everyone claimed Goldeneye for the N64 was the most amazing game ever, but I hated it. I didn't think Super Mario 64 was the best game ever (nor do I think that SMG 1 and 2 are the best Wii games, although yes, they are Top 5).
Also, pot meet kettle on the condescending/rude comments. I notice you aren't exactly avoiding being those things. Either way, I'm not sure why we're arguing this. This is the Wii forum, not the PS3 or 360 forum. If you think the Wii's lineup is crap and the PS3/360 is better, please feel free to leave at any time. I don't go into the 360 forum and crap all over it.
I have never once said that the PS3 or 360 "just sucks" as you are trying to say I have. I simply said that a lot of the games he listed as being the best games on those consoles I couldn't care about. Everyone claimed Goldeneye for the N64 was the most amazing game ever, but I hated it. I didn't think Super Mario 64 was the best game ever (nor do I think that SMG 1 and 2 are the best Wii games, although yes, they are Top 5).
Also, pot meet kettle on the condescending/rude comments. I notice you aren't exactly avoiding being those things
. Either way, I'm not sure why we're arguing this. This is the Wii forum, not the PS3 or 360 forum. If you think the Wii's lineup is crap and the PS3/360 is better, please feel free to leave at any time. I don't go into the 360 forum and crap all over it.
Jesus_S_Preston
CAGiversary!
Well there looks to be three pages of arguing here, so I'll just say this is the only year I have ever genuinely thought, Man, kind of wish I had a Wii.
moothemagiccow
CAG Newbie
egh, i almost fell for you guys' threadshitting. is it really necessary? it's so goddamn condescending and it happens on every wii forum. you guys insecure about your genitalia or something? they're VIDEO GAMES. PLAY THE ONES YOU LIKE. sheesh
[quote name='Altanis']
I have never once said that the PS3 or 360 "just sucks" as you are trying to say I have.
[/QUOTE]
Please point out specifically were I said you said this...if you're inferring or reading between the lines that's on you.
I just checked the thread, and Moo was the only one who uttered the exact words that something sucks. I don't know where you're getting that from. I'm only reading what you wrote and putting my own thoughts on that. Nothing more or less.
[quote name='Altanis']
Also, pot meet kettle on the condescending/rude comments. I notice you aren't exactly avoiding being those things. [/QUOTE]
Please point out specific negative comments, I only pointed out what you said, and never in a negative tone. Someone needs to brush up on reading comprehension...
[quote name='Altanis']
Either way, I'm not sure why we're arguing this. This is the Wii forum, not the PS3 or 360 forum. If you think the Wii's lineup is crap and the PS3/360 is better, please feel free to leave at any time. I don't go into the 360 forum and crap all over it.[/QUOTE]
See my response to Moo below, if I own the system, and over 50 games for it, why in world would I "crap" all over something that I hope does well....
Bloody Hell.
Moo says not to take things seriously, but man, you need to take a lesson from that, big time, seems anyone with a dissenting opinion to your own = enemy. Even if they are on the same side, yet question things. Remind me never to make sure you got my back in battle.
Anyway this is a waste of time, since you think I'm out to get you, which I don't know who you are, don't care, etc. Plus you're the new guy, and unless your name is Fire_Thief I could honestly care less about being mean to somebody I don't know very well.
Have a good day.
Next time I'll look at join dates before joining a conversation, and if they haven't been here longer than 3 years, I know to steer clear.
[quote name='moothemagiccow']egh, i almost fell for you guys' threadshitting. is it really necessary? it's so goddamn condescending and it happens on every wii forum. you guys insecure about your genitalia or something? they're VIDEO GAMES. PLAY THE ONES YOU LIKE. sheesh[/QUOTE]
threadshitting....so apparently open debate = crapping on something that someone believes in or their ideals and I can't disagree without...nevermind. sheesh.
I've noticed something in the past few years, people are so thin-skinned when it comes to this generation of consoles that it feels like a bunch of whiny little kids turning into adults who feel that everybody should be right, no one's allowed an opinion and even when they do and if they have evidence or have taken the time to come up with a valid argument, they are accused of trolling, flame bating, or some other silly, yet lame excuse, by those they are trying to have a civilized conversation with.
Apparently I'm from an older generation that doesn't believe everybody deserves that gold star, just because Timmy can spell his name with a crayon.
Guess I expected intelligent conversation and some valid debate here, and now I see that I was wrong. I just need to stay out of these Wii-centric threads that I know are just minefields in disguise...Sorry I wasted anyone's time with my trolling...
#
I have never once said that the PS3 or 360 "just sucks" as you are trying to say I have.
[/QUOTE]
Please point out specifically were I said you said this...if you're inferring or reading between the lines that's on you.
I just checked the thread, and Moo was the only one who uttered the exact words that something sucks. I don't know where you're getting that from. I'm only reading what you wrote and putting my own thoughts on that. Nothing more or less.
[quote name='Altanis']
Also, pot meet kettle on the condescending/rude comments. I notice you aren't exactly avoiding being those things
. [/QUOTE]Please point out specific negative comments, I only pointed out what you said, and never in a negative tone. Someone needs to brush up on reading comprehension...
[quote name='Altanis']
Either way, I'm not sure why we're arguing this. This is the Wii forum, not the PS3 or 360 forum. If you think the Wii's lineup is crap and the PS3/360 is better, please feel free to leave at any time. I don't go into the 360 forum and crap all over it.[/QUOTE]
See my response to Moo below, if I own the system, and over 50 games for it, why in world would I "crap" all over something that I hope does well....
Bloody Hell. Moo says not to take things seriously, but man, you need to take a lesson from that, big time, seems anyone with a dissenting opinion to your own = enemy. Even if they are on the same side, yet question things. Remind me never to make sure you got my back in battle.
Anyway this is a waste of time, since you think I'm out to get you, which I don't know who you are, don't care, etc. Plus you're the new guy, and unless your name is Fire_Thief I could honestly care less about being mean to somebody I don't know very well.
Have a good day.
Next time I'll look at join dates before joining a conversation, and if they haven't been here longer than 3 years, I know to steer clear.
[quote name='moothemagiccow']egh, i almost fell for you guys' threadshitting. is it really necessary? it's so goddamn condescending and it happens on every wii forum. you guys insecure about your genitalia or something? they're VIDEO GAMES. PLAY THE ONES YOU LIKE. sheesh[/QUOTE]
threadshitting....so apparently open debate = crapping on something that someone believes in or their ideals and I can't disagree without...nevermind.
sheesh. I've noticed something in the past few years, people are so thin-skinned when it comes to this generation of consoles that it feels like a bunch of whiny little kids turning into adults who feel that everybody should be right, no one's allowed an opinion and even when they do and if they have evidence or have taken the time to come up with a valid argument, they are accused of trolling, flame bating, or some other silly, yet lame excuse, by those they are trying to have a civilized conversation with.
Apparently I'm from an older generation that doesn't believe everybody deserves that gold star, just because Timmy can spell his name with a crayon.
Guess I expected intelligent conversation and some valid debate here, and now I see that I was wrong. I just need to stay out of these Wii-centric threads that I know are just minefields in disguise...Sorry I wasted anyone's time with my trolling...
#
Wolfpup
CAGiversary!
Thanks for the kind words uncle5555! The last couple of days have had me curious how many games it is that I personally care about on the Wii since launch, so what the heck, I'll try to remember some (EDIT: okay, I'm resorting to IGN again :lolThis includes stuff I'm interested in but haven't played yet, Metroid: Other M, which I'm currently playing but worried I'll get stuck in (it's pretty fun when it's fun though, but every five seconds there's a boss fight which I sometimes die on 6 times, and sometimes restart and kill the thing in 5 seconds). But I'm excluding stuff I was wanting to like but didn't (Little King's Story) and stuff that may be good but exists on the current gen hardware (although that stuff could be on a list too, just to see if it's possible to have the Wii be your only console...this is the first year where the thought doesn't seem totally laughable to me!) Guess I'm including stuff like Red Steel 2, that honestly I have only a very minor interest in trying.
1-Lost in Shadow (doesn't this sound awesome?)
2-The Last Story
3-Metroid: Other M
4-Metroid Prime 3 (weirdly the hardest boss for me that I originally gave up on was one of the first bosses, but then it gets easier/more leveled out)
5-Super Mario All-Stars
6-New Super Mario Bros.
7-Super Mario Galaxy
8-Super Mario Galaxy 2
9-Super Paper Mario
10-Pikmin (I sold my Gamecube copy, so I'm counting this...and it's still crazy fun)
11-The Munchables
12-No More Heroes 2
13-Rabbids Go Home
14-Goldeneye
15-Sonic Colors
16-Batman: The Brave and the Bold
17-Kirby's Epic Yarn (I've hated all the Kirby games since the 8-bit ones, but this sounds promising and I own it)
18-Muramasa
19-Epic Mickey
20-Donkey Kong Country (I think I'll hate this, get stuck, 'cause it's supposed to be hard, but I'll include it since I am kind of curious and would be jumping on it if the Wii were my only console)
21-Guilty Party
22-Red Steel 2
23-Fragile Dreams
24-Silent Hill: Shattered Memories
25-Cursed Mountain (vague interest)
26-Real Heroes: Firefighter (vague interest)
27-Mushroom Men (vague interest)
28-Mario Kart (vague interest)
29- We Love Golf (vague interest)
30-Chocobo's Dungeon (vague interest)
31-Obscure 2 (vague interest)
32-Mario Party 8 (fun for multiplayer)
Resident Evil 0, 1, and 4 get an honorable mention, but again fall into the “already on the Gamecube” category for me along with DK Jungle Beat, etc.
Aaaaand, that's it for me. Lots more games in the IGN list I went through again that I wanted to like, but ended up disliking.
I'm sure I could get past 50 though, but it would take adding in games that I'm going to play on newer hardware...I mean I'd buy them if the Wii were my only console, but otherwise...
I did notice too as I went backwards through the list that there really are a lot more games NOW that feel like actual GAMES-you know, legitimate things that WE want to play. I mean remember that holiday season Nintendo anchored with friggin WII MUSIC?!? Yeah, things have gotten better-I feel like it's a real game system now that just happens to be using old hardware, and just happens to have a weird controller by default.
Hmm wouldn't that be interesting to try to switch to Nintendo-only for say half a year and see how it goes?
This includes stuff I'm interested in but haven't played yet, Metroid: Other M, which I'm currently playing but worried I'll get stuck in (it's pretty fun when it's fun though, but every five seconds there's a boss fight which I sometimes die on 6 times, and sometimes restart and kill the thing in 5 seconds). But I'm excluding stuff I was wanting to like but didn't (Little King's Story) and stuff that may be good but exists on the current gen hardware (although that stuff could be on a list too, just to see if it's possible to have the Wii be your only console...this is the first year where the thought doesn't seem totally laughable to me!) Guess I'm including stuff like Red Steel 2, that honestly I have only a very minor interest in trying.1-Lost in Shadow (doesn't this sound awesome?)
2-The Last Story
3-Metroid: Other M
4-Metroid Prime 3 (weirdly the hardest boss for me that I originally gave up on was one of the first bosses, but then it gets easier/more leveled out)
5-Super Mario All-Stars
6-New Super Mario Bros.
7-Super Mario Galaxy
8-Super Mario Galaxy 2
9-Super Paper Mario
10-Pikmin (I sold my Gamecube copy, so I'm counting this...and it's still crazy fun)
11-The Munchables
12-No More Heroes 2
13-Rabbids Go Home
14-Goldeneye
15-Sonic Colors
16-Batman: The Brave and the Bold
17-Kirby's Epic Yarn (I've hated all the Kirby games since the 8-bit ones, but this sounds promising and I own it)
18-Muramasa
19-Epic Mickey
20-Donkey Kong Country (I think I'll hate this, get stuck, 'cause it's supposed to be hard, but I'll include it since I am kind of curious and would be jumping on it if the Wii were my only console)
21-Guilty Party
22-Red Steel 2
23-Fragile Dreams
24-Silent Hill: Shattered Memories
25-Cursed Mountain (vague interest)
26-Real Heroes: Firefighter (vague interest)
27-Mushroom Men (vague interest)
28-Mario Kart (vague interest)
29- We Love Golf (vague interest)
30-Chocobo's Dungeon (vague interest)
31-Obscure 2 (vague interest)
32-Mario Party 8 (fun for multiplayer)
Resident Evil 0, 1, and 4 get an honorable mention, but again fall into the “already on the Gamecube” category for me along with DK Jungle Beat, etc.
Aaaaand, that's it for me. Lots more games in the IGN list I went through again that I wanted to like, but ended up disliking.
I'm sure I could get past 50 though, but it would take adding in games that I'm going to play on newer hardware...I mean I'd buy them if the Wii were my only console, but otherwise...
I did notice too as I went backwards through the list that there really are a lot more games NOW that feel like actual GAMES-you know, legitimate things that WE want to play. I mean remember that holiday season Nintendo anchored with friggin WII MUSIC?!? Yeah, things have gotten better-I feel like it's a real game system now that just happens to be using old hardware, and just happens to have a weird controller by default.
Hmm wouldn't that be interesting to try to switch to Nintendo-only for say half a year and see how it goes?
Meh, I see the list of 360/PS3 games that people call "good". They have different taste than me, because there are only about 10 games there I'd consider worth playing at all - and several of those games are also available on Wii anyway.
Like whatever games you want, but if you want support for 360/PS3 being the best systems go post in those forums. Frankly, I'm here because I prefer the Wii and find more good games (on a regular, ongoing basis) for that console.
Oh, and if you are counting on IGN to tell you which Wii games are worth playing, then no wonder you can't find any good games. There aren't many online media outlets that do a good job covering Wii because, quite frankly, the people who make games their living tend to be very traditional core gamers. That's not necessarily a bad thing - most of their audience fits into the same catogory - but it does tend to create a natural bias against the Wii from all evidence that I've seen.
Like whatever games you want, but if you want support for 360/PS3 being the best systems go post in those forums. Frankly, I'm here because I prefer the Wii and find more good games (on a regular, ongoing basis) for that console.
Oh, and if you are counting on IGN to tell you which Wii games are worth playing, then no wonder you can't find any good games. There aren't many online media outlets that do a good job covering Wii because, quite frankly, the people who make games their living tend to be very traditional core gamers. That's not necessarily a bad thing - most of their audience fits into the same catogory - but it does tend to create a natural bias against the Wii from all evidence that I've seen.
Wolfpup
CAGiversary!
[quote name='007']Thing that annoys me throughout this thread: Referring to the 360 and PS3 as the 'current-gen' systems, which implies that Wii isn't.[/QUOTE]
It isn't. I only use hardware generations to talk about hardware generations, not release dates, as we already know release dates. The Dreamcast, Playstation 2, Playstation Portable, Gamecube, Wii, and Xbox 1 are all part of one hardware generation, with relatively similar capabilities (although obviously there's a large jump between the Dreamcast and Xbox, and stuff the lower end systems couldn't do, but generally speaking it wouldn't really be considered enough for a full hardware generation.)
Note that this isn't some sort of insult, it is what it is. And if you want to consider "any currently sold system is current generation" well, I don't think that's useful, but go for it I guess.
Of course if you get into PC hardware generations and were going by that, the Xbox/Playstation are many generations out of date.
It isn't. I only use hardware generations to talk about hardware generations, not release dates, as we already know release dates. The Dreamcast, Playstation 2, Playstation Portable, Gamecube, Wii, and Xbox 1 are all part of one hardware generation, with relatively similar capabilities (although obviously there's a large jump between the Dreamcast and Xbox, and stuff the lower end systems couldn't do, but generally speaking it wouldn't really be considered enough for a full hardware generation.)
Note that this isn't some sort of insult, it is what it is. And if you want to consider "any currently sold system is current generation" well, I don't think that's useful, but go for it I guess.
Of course if you get into PC hardware generations and were going by that, the Xbox/Playstation are many generations out of date.
My only two cents is that all three consoles suffer from sequels. Yes, the Wii got sequels to Donkey Kong, Kirby, Mario, etc....but the 360/PS3 got sequels to Fallout, Assassin's Creed, and a whole world of other stuff. Which is not a bad thing, but it is what it is. I love sequels, especially to games that haven't been updated a long time (ala Kirby and DKC) so I'm not going to bash them. But lets face it, all three consoles have suffered a drain of innovation as of late.
Which is expected given that happens around this time in a console's life cycle.
As far as quality games go, anyone that says the Wii lacks core content has been pretty
ing blind the last several years. I own more games for my Wii then I do my PS3 by far (nearly double). Its more of a matter of taste than it is which has quality software, its far more subjective than what a bunch of fanboys exemplify. I mean, going back a couple generations ago, a whole world of people love the N64. I hate that ing system, there has been about ten games I enjoyed on it and beyond that, I could care less for it. I thought the PSOne had more games I cared for on it.
But that's strictly my opinion and I know a lot of people that would disagree with that. Well, when it comes to this generation, I feel the Wii by far has more quality software I liked than the PS3/360. It is what it is. To argue a point of subjectivity is futile.
Which is expected given that happens around this time in a console's life cycle.
As far as quality games go, anyone that says the Wii lacks core content has been pretty
ing blind the last several years. I own more games for my Wii then I do my PS3 by far (nearly double). Its more of a matter of taste than it is which has quality software, its far more subjective than what a bunch of fanboys exemplify. I mean, going back a couple generations ago, a whole world of people love the N64. I hate that ing system, there has been about ten games I enjoyed on it and beyond that, I could care less for it. I thought the PSOne had more games I cared for on it. But that's strictly my opinion and I know a lot of people that would disagree with that. Well, when it comes to this generation, I feel the Wii by far has more quality software I liked than the PS3/360. It is what it is. To argue a point of subjectivity is futile.
007
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Wolfpup']It isn't. I only use hardware generations to talk about hardware generations, not release dates, as we already know release dates. The Dreamcast, Playstation 2, Playstation Portable, Gamecube, Wii, and Xbox 1 are all part of one hardware generation, with relatively similar capabilities (although obviously there's a large jump between the Dreamcast and Xbox, and stuff the lower end systems couldn't do, but generally speaking it wouldn't really be considered enough for a full hardware generation.)
Note that this isn't some sort of insult, it is what it is. And if you want to consider "any currently sold system is current generation" well, I don't think that's useful, but go for it I guess.
Of course if you get into PC hardware generations and were going by that, the Xbox/Playstation are many generations out of date.[/QUOTE]
While I get that, it still smacks of referring to the Wii as a 'lesser system', which I find to really be a subjective statement. Is it the most powerful system? Certainly not. The question truly is, why does that matter? Let's be fair here, the PS3 and 360 have HD graphics, online, a store to buy things from, in console storage, and (now) motion controls. What other qualifications does the Wii need to be in the same generation?
Your layout also begs a question... you consider the PSP to be from the last generation, but you have no mention of the DS. Was that an oversight, or does it not count in this generation? I'm honestly curious as to the answer. To further that, what would the 3DS be when it eventually launches?
At the end of the day, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I've always classified generations by the systems that are in direct competition with one another. I admit, the Wii sort of throws a wrench into that, as this is really one of the first times that one of those consoles in direct competition didn't make the same hardware jump... but I think it's ridiculous to consider it last-gen. That's just me, though.
Note that this isn't some sort of insult, it is what it is. And if you want to consider "any currently sold system is current generation" well, I don't think that's useful, but go for it I guess.
Of course if you get into PC hardware generations and were going by that, the Xbox/Playstation are many generations out of date.[/QUOTE]
While I get that, it still smacks of referring to the Wii as a 'lesser system', which I find to really be a subjective statement. Is it the most powerful system? Certainly not. The question truly is, why does that matter? Let's be fair here, the PS3 and 360 have HD graphics, online, a store to buy things from, in console storage, and (now) motion controls. What other qualifications does the Wii need to be in the same generation?
Your layout also begs a question... you consider the PSP to be from the last generation, but you have no mention of the DS. Was that an oversight, or does it not count in this generation? I'm honestly curious as to the answer. To further that, what would the 3DS be when it eventually launches?
At the end of the day, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I've always classified generations by the systems that are in direct competition with one another. I admit, the Wii sort of throws a wrench into that, as this is really one of the first times that one of those consoles in direct competition didn't make the same hardware jump... but I think it's ridiculous to consider it last-gen. That's just me, though.
Wolfpup
CAGiversary!
[quote name='007']While I get that, it still smacks of referring to the Wii as a 'lesser system', which I find to really be a subjective statement. Is it the most powerful system? Certainly not. The question truly is, why does that matter?[/quote]
It doesn't in and of itself really. It's just a shorthand for the relative hardware performance of various systems.
The same class of hardware as far as I'm concerned. I mean maybe that's no longer the way most people take that phrase, but I know when systems are available, and I know when systems are supported, so that doesn't tell me anything. Before it's always meant relative hardware performance more than anything to do with release date, which was just incidental.
It's two generations old hardware. Basically the DS, Saturn, Playstation 1, and N64 are all part of the same generation.
Last gen from the looks of it. Appears to probably fit in somewhere around the Dreamcast/Playstation 2/Playstation Portable. GBA was more or less two generations old at the time of it's release too, although maybe that's a little tricky, since it was probably the most powerful system overall of that generation, yet really not part of the next one...so sort of like the Xbox 1 of it's gen I guess.
Yeah, no that's fine. I don't know if it helps that I emphasize "hardware generation" or not, since I'm really talking about the hardware. Maybe I'm just being an ass. Maybe I like thinking of things in terms of the hardware. I don't know.
It doesn't in and of itself really. It's just a shorthand for the relative hardware performance of various systems.
The same class of hardware as far as I'm concerned. I mean maybe that's no longer the way most people take that phrase, but I know when systems are available, and I know when systems are supported, so that doesn't tell me anything. Before it's always meant relative hardware performance more than anything to do with release date, which was just incidental.
It's two generations old hardware. Basically the DS, Saturn, Playstation 1, and N64 are all part of the same generation.
Last gen from the looks of it. Appears to probably fit in somewhere around the Dreamcast/Playstation 2/Playstation Portable. GBA was more or less two generations old at the time of it's release too, although maybe that's a little tricky, since it was probably the most powerful system overall of that generation, yet really not part of the next one...so sort of like the Xbox 1 of it's gen I guess.
Yeah, no that's fine. I don't know if it helps that I emphasize "hardware generation" or not, since I'm really talking about the hardware. Maybe I'm just being an ass. Maybe I like thinking of things in terms of the hardware. I don't know.
[quote name='ejamer']Meh, I see the list of 360/PS3 games that people call "good". They have different taste than me, because there are only about 10 games there I'd consider worth playing at all - and several of those games are also available on Wii anyway.[/QUOTE]
This. When I bought the Wii in May, yeah, I had been planning for months (and really, years) to buy one, but I also was debating the PS3 or even 360. I ended up getting the Wii because the games I liked were available for it, and also because the upcoming releases were also pretty strong.
I decided against a PS3 because their lineup, much like the 360s, seems pretty meh to me. Like I said above, normally a new Need for Speed game would be kick-ass... yet, I don't even want it (plus, it's available for the Wii, although I've literally heard 0 about that... I only discovered they made a Wii version on accident, when I searched Amazon for one of the PS1 or PS2 games.
I agree with this as well. IGN doesn't seem to cover Wii stuff very well. I'm not the "core" gamer I guess, because my attention span doesn't let me play the same game all the way through, or because I don't have a huge budget for my gaming setup or anything. I also tend to play with at least 1 friend, and none of us take gaming as life- it's all fun.
This. When I bought the Wii in May, yeah, I had been planning for months (and really, years) to buy one, but I also was debating the PS3 or even 360. I ended up getting the Wii because the games I liked were available for it, and also because the upcoming releases were also pretty strong.
I decided against a PS3 because their lineup, much like the 360s, seems pretty meh to me. Like I said above, normally a new Need for Speed game would be kick-ass... yet, I don't even want it (plus, it's available for the Wii, although I've literally heard 0 about that... I only discovered they made a Wii version on accident, when I searched Amazon for one of the PS1 or PS2 games.
This. Plus, Wii games are already cheaper. I find the prices I pay for my Wii games are much much much lower than PS3 games I would want. I've bought two systems and all my games and accessories for under $1000 out of pocket, which is unheard of for the PS3 or 360 (I also am never able to find clearance games).
I agree with this as well. IGN doesn't seem to cover Wii stuff very well. I'm not the "core" gamer I guess, because my attention span doesn't let me play the same game all the way through, or because I don't have a huge budget for my gaming setup or anything. I also tend to play with at least 1 friend, and none of us take gaming as life- it's all fun.
TheLongshot
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 10 (100%)
[quote name='007']At the end of the day, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I've always classified generations by the systems that are in direct competition with one another. I admit, the Wii sort of throws a wrench into that, as this is really one of the first times that one of those consoles in direct competition didn't make the same hardware jump... but I think it's ridiculous to consider it last-gen. That's just me, though.[/QUOTE]
Considering that I own both a PS2 and a Wii, I don't have much doubt which console's games looks better, so to say the Wii is a "last generation" console is selling it short. They just decided to make different design decisions. While the "core" gamer might have felt left behind by it, it does seem to be a good decision by Nintendo.
Personally, I would have liked to have gotten a PS3, but price and family-friendliness made Wii a better overall choice, and I don't regret it much. My 4 year old gets a lot of joy playing SMG2 and Kirby right now.
Considering that I own both a PS2 and a Wii, I don't have much doubt which console's games looks better, so to say the Wii is a "last generation" console is selling it short. They just decided to make different design decisions. While the "core" gamer might have felt left behind by it, it does seem to be a good decision by Nintendo.
Personally, I would have liked to have gotten a PS3, but price and family-friendliness made Wii a better overall choice, and I don't regret it much. My 4 year old gets a lot of joy playing SMG2 and Kirby right now.
bk187
CAGiversary!
[quote name='007']I've always classified generations by the systems that are in direct competition with one another.[/QUOTE]
This seems to be the simplest way to do it in my book. The hardware generation idea just seems overwrought and complicated while simultaneously missing the point.
This seems to be the simplest way to do it in my book. The hardware generation idea just seems overwrought and complicated while simultaneously missing the point.
There are a lot of really great games for the Wii, and this year has been an especially good one. I've generally enjoyed the games I've downloaded too, though those are few and far between because of the lack of demos which is a sore point for me. It's also a sore point for Nintendo, because I buy a lot more Xbox 360 download titles then I do WiiWare, VC and DSiWare, and that's because of the lack of demos for all download titles across the board. The limited demos they are doing now are welcome, but not nearly enough. I was pleased to see that they *finally* put up a demo for a game on the day of release, that being for Fluidity. I'm looking forward to trying that out tonight. Of course the fact that they didn't also release demos for the other games released today has me presuming that those are complete and utter crap.
Of course there's also the lack of system-wide achievements, the lack of an online community, etc. For all these reasons I really want Nintendo to get moving on the sequel to the Wii.
Of course there's also the lack of system-wide achievements, the lack of an online community, etc. For all these reasons I really want Nintendo to get moving on the sequel to the Wii.
TheLongshot
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 10 (100%)
[quote name='crunchewy']There are a lot of really great games for the Wii, and this year has been an especially good one. I've generally enjoyed the games I've downloaded too, though those are few and far between because of the lack of demos which is a sore point for me. It's also a sore point for Nintendo, because I buy a lot more Xbox 360 download titles then I do WiiWare, VC and DSiWare, and that's because of the lack of demos for all download titles across the board. The limited demos they are doing now are welcome, but not nearly enough. I was pleased to see that they *finally* put up a demo for a game on the day of release, that being for Fluidity. I'm looking forward to trying that out tonight. Of course the fact that they didn't also release demos for the other games released today has me presuming that those are complete and utter crap.
Of course there's also the lack of system-wide achievements, the lack of an online community, etc. For all these reasons I really want Nintendo to get moving on the sequel to the Wii.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that is one aspect that I think Nintendo really fumbled. I really have little incentive to buy much online or even to go online.
Of course there's also the lack of system-wide achievements, the lack of an online community, etc. For all these reasons I really want Nintendo to get moving on the sequel to the Wii.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that is one aspect that I think Nintendo really fumbled. I really have little incentive to buy much online or even to go online.
Can someone please explain to me why achievements are this necessity in consoles? It's like all people on the 360 care about is getting the achievements in a game, not actually enjoying the experience. They trudge through a game they despise just to say that they finished it, which isn't what gaming is about (unless I've completely been left behind by some new standard).
I don't mind the relative lack of online play because in my dorm (where I am 9 months a year), I either can connect my laptop or my gaming system to the internet, but not both at the same time. I have played a few Wii games online while at home, but I also have noticed that the system is pretty poorly designed. There's so many things they really need to change (instead of 16 digit friend codes, please at least allow for GamerTags or something similar. I can remember those without writing them down), but to me I don't need online play.
I don't mind the relative lack of online play because in my dorm (where I am 9 months a year), I either can connect my laptop or my gaming system to the internet, but not both at the same time. I have played a few Wii games online while at home, but I also have noticed that the system is pretty poorly designed. There's so many things they really need to change (instead of 16 digit friend codes, please at least allow for GamerTags or something similar. I can remember those without writing them down), but to me I don't need online play.
bk187
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Altanis']Can someone please explain to me why achievements are this necessity in consoles? It's like all people on the 360 care about is getting the achievements in a game, not actually enjoying the experience. They trudge through a game they despise just to say that they finished it, which isn't what gaming is about (unless I've completely been left behind by some new standard).[/QUOTE]
As much as I would like to bemoan the rise of achievements all day and night, it is the new standard of video games.
As much as I would like to bemoan the rise of achievements all day and night, it is the new standard of video games.
moothemagiccow
CAG Newbie
[quote name='Altanis']Can someone please explain to me why achievements are this necessity in consoles? It's like all people on the 360 care about is getting the achievements in a game, not actually enjoying the experience. They trudge through a game they despise just to say that they finished it, which isn't what gaming is about (unless I've completely been left behind by some new standard).[/QUOTE]
Sometimes they're cool and they devise a different way of playing the game. People used to challenge themselves to play the game differently before trophies/achievements and they still do. For example, some folks try to beat Legend of Zelda without picking up a heart container upgrade.
The ones in fat princess were neat - one was to get 100 kills in every class - archer, mage, etc. It's an online capture the flag game, and that was one way to keep it interesting if you'd gotten bored of normal play. Maybe you stuck to one class too much and the trophy encouraged you to play all of them.
But I agree, most of the time they are pretty dull, especially the "get all the other trophies" trophy. The people who obsess over them are goofy.
Sometimes they're cool and they devise a different way of playing the game. People used to challenge themselves to play the game differently before trophies/achievements and they still do. For example, some folks try to beat Legend of Zelda without picking up a heart container upgrade.
The ones in fat princess were neat - one was to get 100 kills in every class - archer, mage, etc. It's an online capture the flag game, and that was one way to keep it interesting if you'd gotten bored of normal play. Maybe you stuck to one class too much and the trophy encouraged you to play all of them.
But I agree, most of the time they are pretty dull, especially the "get all the other trophies" trophy. The people who obsess over them are goofy.
[quote name='Corvin'] Generalize much?[/QUOTE]
You can't read can you? I wasn't generalizing, I was making an observation. In nearly every 360 game thread people comment about achievements. Are they really that big of a deal? I don't get the point of them, and asked a legitimate question about why they were so important and why people thought the Wii just absolutely needed them. And yes, I understand that the PS3 has a system similar to the 360's. However, PS3 players don't bemoan only getting 999/1000 on a game nearly as much as the 360 people do.
I swear, any thread that praises the Wii in the tiniest bit is always shat all over by PS3 and 360 fanboys who try to jump down any Wii supporter's throat.
I play games for the experience and to enjoy it. I don't need a system telling me how to have fun to enjoy a game. Yet that seems like one major "flaw" the Wii online play has according to people here. Online play on the Wii isn't that great, but it also does its job just fine. Yeah, there's a bit left to be desired, but at least Nintendo has some form now. The GCN barely had anything.
Generalize much?[/QUOTE]You can't read can you? I wasn't generalizing, I was making an observation. In nearly every 360 game thread people comment about achievements. Are they really that big of a deal? I don't get the point of them, and asked a legitimate question about why they were so important and why people thought the Wii just absolutely needed them. And yes, I understand that the PS3 has a system similar to the 360's. However, PS3 players don't bemoan only getting 999/1000 on a game nearly as much as the 360 people do.
I swear, any thread that praises the Wii in the tiniest bit is always shat all over by PS3 and 360 fanboys who try to jump down any Wii supporter's throat.
I play games for the experience and to enjoy it. I don't need a system telling me how to have fun to enjoy a game. Yet that seems like one major "flaw" the Wii online play has according to people here. Online play on the Wii isn't that great, but it also does its job just fine. Yeah, there's a bit left to be desired, but at least Nintendo has some form now. The GCN barely had anything.
bk187
CAGiversary!
Achievements aren't really the problem in and of themself. I mean they are decent way of introducing challenges to gameplay while keeping the easier way of doing things available to those who don't want to take up the challenge. However, problems arise due to several reasons:
1. Xbox games are required to have a certain number of achievements which creates achievement points for doing pointless crap or stuff you would do any way. These pointless achievements seem like a product of the "everyone is special" mentality that society has today and that every kid who participates deserves an award for participation. To quote the noob effect, "there is such a thing as talent," we don't need to reward mediocrity.
2. Achievements inevitably lead to epeen discussions which is really the biggest problem. People will always find ways to lord things over others and point out how they are better than others, achievement points being a supremely stupid version of this.
What would really solve things would be the hiding of achievements so that they are not viewable or linkable to others on top of the abolition of mandatory achievement points for game developers. However, I don't see either of these happening ever.
1. Xbox games are required to have a certain number of achievements which creates achievement points for doing pointless crap or stuff you would do any way. These pointless achievements seem like a product of the "everyone is special" mentality that society has today and that every kid who participates deserves an award for participation. To quote the noob effect, "there is such a thing as talent," we don't need to reward mediocrity.
2. Achievements inevitably lead to epeen discussions which is really the biggest problem. People will always find ways to lord things over others and point out how they are better than others, achievement points being a supremely stupid version of this.
What would really solve things would be the hiding of achievements so that they are not viewable or linkable to others on top of the abolition of mandatory achievement points for game developers. However, I don't see either of these happening ever.
I felt the same way about achievements before I got a 360. Then I got a 360. Achievements can be fun and some games do them right. Yes, some don't, but that doesn't change the fact that they are fun in other games. Trials HD is a great example. Some of the achievements get you to perform stunts you'd otherwise have no reason to do. They are fun little challenges that enhance the game. Also they can help you track progress and it's fun to look at what achievements your friends have gotten in games. The short version is they are fun and if given the option of a version of a game without them and one with them, I will probably pick "with".
I'm torn about achievements. They can add replay value when done right, and clearly can help to make a great game even better... but they can also be a lazy way for developers to appeal to the gaming OCD instinct that so many have, possibly even damaging the game experience in the process. (Usually you can just ignore them though, so usually I'm in favor of having achievements available as long as the developer makes some effort.)
What does bug me is the vocal pride that people express in gathering virtual trophies or achievements. Do it because you like the game, not because you are so desperate to impress a group of virtual friends.
What does bug me is the vocal pride that people express in gathering virtual trophies or achievements. Do it because you like the game, not because you are so desperate to impress a group of virtual friends.
KingBroly
CAGiversary!
My hatred for Other M knows no bounds. But I've come up with Achievements for it that will add some great replay value.
Achievements are a necessary evil. However, I'd like the ability to not earn them at all. I don't want them hanging over my head, even in the background if I don't want them to. Even if I'm not seeing them being unlocked, I know in the back of my mind I've unlocked one or two or four, and it kinda takes me out of it a little bit.
I - Burn the Disc
II - Burn the Case
III - Burn the Manuals
II - Burn the Case
III - Burn the Manuals
Achievements are a necessary evil. However, I'd like the ability to not earn them at all. I don't want them hanging over my head, even in the background if I don't want them to. Even if I'm not seeing them being unlocked, I know in the back of my mind I've unlocked one or two or four, and it kinda takes me out of it a little bit.
[quote name='Altanis']
I play games for the experience and to enjoy it. I don't need a system telling me how to have fun to enjoy a game. [/QUOTE]
Do you go for purple coins in Galaxy? Did you 100% the Metroid games? Get all your medals in Wii Sports Resort? Find all those Heart Containers in Zelda? Those games are "telling you how to have fun to enjoy a game." The only difference between that and a 360/PS3 game is merely having a way to share and track those "achievements" with friends. It's really no different.
[quote name='Altanis']In nearly every 360 game thread people comment about achievements. Are they really that big of a deal? I don't get the point of them, and asked a legitimate question about why they were so important and why people thought the Wii just absolutely needed them. [/QUOTE]
From your post it sounds like you don't own a 360, so why are you reading "nearly every 360 game thread?" lol That is certainly a generalization.
But if you are honestly looking for a serious answer then it's simple... replay. Just like the samples I cited above for Wii games, for the most part Achievements give you extra things to do or shoot for in a game. Personally I go through a game once for the experience and if I liked it well enough I'll go back and clean up on the achievements that look fun or doable. Just like purple coins in Mario or Missile tanks in Metroid. They give you more time in a game you enjoy therefore giving you more playtime for your money. They also add challenge to those looking for it. Personally I thought both Galaxy games were too easy, but the purple coins give someone like me more enjoyment. Catching the biggest fish in Ocarina? Why bother? Because it's fun and something to keep you in that game world longer.
Three of my favorite non-Wii examples; in both Condemned and Mirror's Edge there is an achievement for finishing the game without firing a gun. Both were challenging and fun and were made better by those achievements, and I would have never thought to do that in either game. Then in Dead Rising there is one for killing 53,000+ zombies in one playthrough. Again, who would think to do that without that little nudge from the developers? It was a fun way to kill a couple hours, nothing more. There are hundreds of good examples just like there are plenty of shitty ones (kill 1 gajillion Locust in Gears of War with a pistol). As with anything, there's going to be good and bad examples.
As for thread discussions go, once a game is finished there's not much to talk about, so in the same way that achievements add playtime, they also give people more to talk about, how to do something, etc. I have to turn this one around on the Wii as well... there was tons of talk in the Other M thread about getting all the E-tanks, Missile tanks, where to find them and what not to get 100%. Why? Because they are fun to hunt down and just something to talk about. Discussing achievements ≠ bragging about your e-cock.
Like crunchewy said, it's one thing to "not get it" when you don't own the system, it's another thing when you get that game you love and want to do more in it and the achievements just "click" with you and it snowballs from there.
Does the Wii need a global tracking system? Of course not. Would it be nice? Sure. I'm getting all those "extras" anyway, why not have a system that allows you to compare with your friends? I don't see it happening though with Nintendo's online structure.
I play games for the experience and to enjoy it. I don't need a system telling me how to have fun to enjoy a game. [/QUOTE]
Do you go for purple coins in Galaxy? Did you 100% the Metroid games? Get all your medals in Wii Sports Resort? Find all those Heart Containers in Zelda? Those games are "telling you how to have fun to enjoy a game." The only difference between that and a 360/PS3 game is merely having a way to share and track those "achievements" with friends. It's really no different.
[quote name='Altanis']In nearly every 360 game thread people comment about achievements. Are they really that big of a deal? I don't get the point of them, and asked a legitimate question about why they were so important and why people thought the Wii just absolutely needed them. [/QUOTE]
From your post it sounds like you don't own a 360, so why are you reading "nearly every 360 game thread?" lol That is certainly a generalization.
But if you are honestly looking for a serious answer then it's simple... replay. Just like the samples I cited above for Wii games, for the most part Achievements give you extra things to do or shoot for in a game. Personally I go through a game once for the experience and if I liked it well enough I'll go back and clean up on the achievements that look fun or doable. Just like purple coins in Mario or Missile tanks in Metroid. They give you more time in a game you enjoy therefore giving you more playtime for your money. They also add challenge to those looking for it. Personally I thought both Galaxy games were too easy, but the purple coins give someone like me more enjoyment. Catching the biggest fish in Ocarina? Why bother? Because it's fun and something to keep you in that game world longer.
Three of my favorite non-Wii examples; in both Condemned and Mirror's Edge there is an achievement for finishing the game without firing a gun. Both were challenging and fun and were made better by those achievements, and I would have never thought to do that in either game. Then in Dead Rising there is one for killing 53,000+ zombies in one playthrough. Again, who would think to do that without that little nudge from the developers? It was a fun way to kill a couple hours, nothing more. There are hundreds of good examples just like there are plenty of shitty ones (kill 1 gajillion Locust in Gears of War with a pistol). As with anything, there's going to be good and bad examples.
As for thread discussions go, once a game is finished there's not much to talk about, so in the same way that achievements add playtime, they also give people more to talk about, how to do something, etc. I have to turn this one around on the Wii as well... there was tons of talk in the Other M thread about getting all the E-tanks, Missile tanks, where to find them and what not to get 100%. Why? Because they are fun to hunt down and just something to talk about. Discussing achievements ≠ bragging about your e-cock.
Like crunchewy said, it's one thing to "not get it" when you don't own the system, it's another thing when you get that game you love and want to do more in it and the achievements just "click" with you and it snowballs from there.
Does the Wii need a global tracking system? Of course not. Would it be nice? Sure. I'm getting all those "extras" anyway, why not have a system that allows you to compare with your friends? I don't see it happening though with Nintendo's online structure.
[quote name='KingBroly']My hatred for Other M knows no bounds. [/QUOTE]
I honestly thought you liked Other M. I'm confused. Well, I liked it a lot, but I didn't have any investment in the line of games, never having really played any of the others.
And Corvin put it better then I did, regarding achievements. Spot on!
I honestly thought you liked Other M. I'm confused. Well, I liked it a lot, but I didn't have any investment in the line of games, never having really played any of the others.
And Corvin put it better then I did, regarding achievements. Spot on!
Wolfpup
CAGiversary!
[quote name='KingBroly']My hatred for Other M knows no bounds. But I've come up with Achievements for it that will add some great replay value.
[/quote]
Just noticed this. I'm very curious, what do you hate about it?
So far the part I like least is the constant boss fights, and fighting in general. I don't always hate the fights (although I've come close to quitting at least once, when I was fighting this bee hive), but I like the story and exploration, but kind of feel "oh, here we go again" every 5 minutes when there's yet another boss fight. Half the normal enemies are basically boss fights too :lol:
Not sure how I feel about achievements. I went from neutral to super against them to sort of positive to I'm not sure now. I went super negative when I saw people buying or playing games they didn't want to because of it. And I don't like how you can't delete ones you don't want, and I agree they sort of take you out of it. They're sort of addicting though too, but I'm not sure I like that.
Like when I enjoy a PC or a Wii or a PSP or a DS game, I kind of start forgetting about them, but yet I'll sometimes think "I'd buy that/play through that again if it had points/trophies".
I don't know...it's far from the worst recent development in games (I'd say worst is the partial destruction of gaming thanks to activation, second worst might be motion/touch stuff when it's not OPTIONAL). But I like people playing games to play games, you know? This meta thing is annoying. And I'm ticked off I couldn't get points in Halo 2 since I CAN'T EVEN LOG IN TO Microsoft's servers with their stupid software!
I - Burn the Disc
II - Burn the Case
III - Burn the Manuals
II - Burn the Case
III - Burn the Manuals
Just noticed this. I'm very curious, what do you hate about it?
So far the part I like least is the constant boss fights, and fighting in general. I don't always hate the fights (although I've come close to quitting at least once, when I was fighting this bee hive), but I like the story and exploration, but kind of feel "oh, here we go again" every 5 minutes when there's yet another boss fight. Half the normal enemies are basically boss fights too :lol:
I've thought the story and presentation were really good right from the beginning, but I'm just past the point where you see that scientist and she's running from you...and it turns out it's for good reason, she thinks you're there to kill her, and she saw someone dressed in Galactic Federation armor kill someone else almost right in front of her...and THAT boss fight with the big vehicle thing was pretty cool since it was actually against a human, and also reminded me a bit of Aliens. The only stupid thing about that is after you destroy the vehicle, the obvious thing is YOU WALK OVER AND FIND OUT WHO THE HELL WAS DRIVING IT, and instead...nothing, and not even a mention to Adam about what happened (although I suppose that could be smart, although I thought he was watching everything you did anyway?) Oh well, I'm still enjoying it, though still worried I'll get stuck.
Not sure how I feel about achievements. I went from neutral to super against them to sort of positive to I'm not sure now. I went super negative when I saw people buying or playing games they didn't want to because of it. And I don't like how you can't delete ones you don't want, and I agree they sort of take you out of it. They're sort of addicting though too, but I'm not sure I like that.
Like when I enjoy a PC or a Wii or a PSP or a DS game, I kind of start forgetting about them, but yet I'll sometimes think "I'd buy that/play through that again if it had points/trophies".
I don't know...it's far from the worst recent development in games (I'd say worst is the partial destruction of gaming thanks to activation, second worst might be motion/touch stuff when it's not OPTIONAL). But I like people playing games to play games, you know? This meta thing is annoying. And I'm ticked off I couldn't get points in Halo 2 since I CAN'T EVEN LOG IN TO Microsoft's servers with their stupid software!
[quote name='Wolfpup']I went super negative when I saw people buying or playing games they didn't want to because of it. And I don't like how you can't delete ones you don't want, and I agree they sort of take you out of it. They're sort of addicting though too, but I'm not sure I like that.[/QUOTE]
Why worry about why other people play games? I don't buy games soley for achievements (King Kong? Uh, no thanks), but if that's what others like to do, then why not? Go for it, I say. On the other hand I'm right there with you about not being able to delete games from your achievement lists. I wish we could do that. iOS's (iPhone, etc) Game Center allows this. When you delete a game it gives you the option to delete it from Game Center too. The Xbox should let you do that too. I've got a few games in there I'm never going to play, and I'd rather that I could delete them. Still, it's not really a big deal. They'll get pushed down as I play more games I do like.
Why worry about why other people play games? I don't buy games soley for achievements (King Kong? Uh, no thanks), but if that's what others like to do, then why not? Go for it, I say. On the other hand I'm right there with you about not being able to delete games from your achievement lists. I wish we could do that. iOS's (iPhone, etc) Game Center allows this. When you delete a game it gives you the option to delete it from Game Center too. The Xbox should let you do that too. I've got a few games in there I'm never going to play, and I'd rather that I could delete them. Still, it's not really a big deal. They'll get pushed down as I play more games I do like.
[quote name='Corvin']Do you go for purple coins in Galaxy? Did you 100% the Metroid games? Get all your medals in Wii Sports Resort? Find all those Heart Containers in Zelda? Those games are "telling you how to have fun to enjoy a game." The only difference between that and a 360/PS3 game is merely having a way to share and track those "achievements" with friends. It's really no different.[/quote]
Nope, nope, and nope. Like I said, I play games to enjoy them, not to make sure I get every fricking thing possible.
I also had the motion controls that are unnecessary. About the only games that really get it right are Nintendo-published (with a few others). Even then, I feel like those in DKC:R are hastily added with no real rhyme or reason to them.
Nope, nope, and nope. Like I said, I play games to enjoy them, not to make sure I get every fricking thing possible.
Sounds like I don't own one? At least I read, since I've made it pretty damn clear I don't own, or want, a 360 or PS3.
If you are trying to Platinum a game or (whatever the term is), all you are doing is forcibly playing the game to get an achievement (which is true over a BUNCH of games). I don't play a game with the thought process of needing to get everything or whatever. The only games I do that in are the ones that it's required in order to beat every level (NSMB, Kirby). I don't aim for 100% in a game,
I don't need to be told what to do in a game to enjoy it. Killing zombies, not firing a gun, etc, are all nice things to extend someone's play time maybe, but why do I need to do that in order to have fun? Exactly: I don't. Which is my entire problem with achievements, that they require you to do something that basically becomes you trudging through the game in order to complete it.
That might be so, but I still don't get why the lack of achievements is, as multiple people here have claimed, one of the biggest flaws of Nintendo's online play. If anything, the biggest flaw is that the online play is often just bad or unnecessary. The online play does however do what its name says: it lets you play online. It's simplistic but effective (at least in Mario Kart and other 1st-party titles).
I don't think Nintendo will add achievements or anything simply because then they will be seen as copying Microsoft and Sony- right after each of them just took the motion controls of the Wii and put their own spin on them.
I also had the motion controls that are unnecessary. About the only games that really get it right are Nintendo-published (with a few others). Even then, I feel like those in DKC:R are hastily added with no real rhyme or reason to them.
soonersfan60
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 132 (100%)
I only go for "achievements" when I get something for the "accomplishment." Not just bragging rights or a trophy, but access to new worlds or play in reverse or something.
And I have 35-40 quality Wii titles that we've owned since the system launched. If you avoid shovelware and listen to substantive recommendations, you would never run out of good Wii games to play.
And I have 35-40 quality Wii titles that we've owned since the system launched. If you avoid shovelware and listen to substantive recommendations, you would never run out of good Wii games to play.
[quote name='Altanis']Nope, nope, and nope. Like I said, I play games to enjoy them, not to make sure I get every fricking thing possible. \[/QUOTE]
That's fair, but I'm making the comparison since a lot of people do go for those things in Nintendo games and then turn around and bash achievements. It's a bit hypocritical, IMO.
[quote name='Altanis']
If you are trying to Platinum a game or (whatever the term is), all you are doing is forcibly playing the game to get an achievement (which is true over a BUNCH of games). [/QUOTE]
And you are speaking from what perspective having never owned a 360 or PS3? I'm not trying to get on your case, but you are projecting your opinion on the masses without having a valid perspective.
Sure some people "trudge" through games, but some just want more of the experience, much like multiplayer is a component of the main game. Take Bioshock and Bioshock 2. I LOVED both games but even after 15-20 hours of each, it wasn't enough. I wasn't ready to leave Rapture just yet, so having some achievements gave me a reason to hop back in and not just "trudge" through the game again as you put it. I had just as much fun going for those as I did playing the main game.
[quote name='Altanis'] I don't play a game with the thought process of needing to get everything or whatever. [/QUOTE]
And that is fine, not everyone does, but some like to get the most out of their purchase so why bemoan the way others play their games?
Also to be fair, the "achievement" mentality has been around for 30 years with games in the form of speed runs, collectibles, performing "tricks" like the 99-life Mario thing, gaining a different ending, high scores, etc. All Microsoft did was put a sound effect, generic numeral value and pop-up image to go with what's people have been doing in games for decades already. That's why having a beef with achievements is pretty silly considering they've, more or less, been around a lot longer than the 360 or PS3.
That's fair, but I'm making the comparison since a lot of people do go for those things in Nintendo games and then turn around and bash achievements. It's a bit hypocritical, IMO.
[quote name='Altanis']
If you are trying to Platinum a game or (whatever the term is), all you are doing is forcibly playing the game to get an achievement (which is true over a BUNCH of games). [/QUOTE]
And you are speaking from what perspective having never owned a 360 or PS3? I'm not trying to get on your case, but you are projecting your opinion on the masses without having a valid perspective.
Sure some people "trudge" through games, but some just want more of the experience, much like multiplayer is a component of the main game. Take Bioshock and Bioshock 2. I LOVED both games but even after 15-20 hours of each, it wasn't enough. I wasn't ready to leave Rapture just yet, so having some achievements gave me a reason to hop back in and not just "trudge" through the game again as you put it. I had just as much fun going for those as I did playing the main game.
[quote name='Altanis'] I don't play a game with the thought process of needing to get everything or whatever. [/QUOTE]
And that is fine, not everyone does, but some like to get the most out of their purchase so why bemoan the way others play their games?
Also to be fair, the "achievement" mentality has been around for 30 years with games in the form of speed runs, collectibles, performing "tricks" like the 99-life Mario thing, gaining a different ending, high scores, etc. All Microsoft did was put a sound effect, generic numeral value and pop-up image to go with what's people have been doing in games for decades already. That's why having a beef with achievements is pretty silly considering they've, more or less, been around a lot longer than the 360 or PS3.
Altanis and Corvin are both right in my eyes. I used to have more time for those, but now rarely find myself going back to a game. So now its just a playthrough for me or if I hear of something on a gamesite that seems really cool, I might do that.
but I really think both your points are vaild, and probably come down to total time available to play.
but I really think both your points are vaild, and probably come down to total time available to play.
Achilles00
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='Snake2715']Hmm is epic yarn that good? I may have to look into it.
Have not got Metroid other M yet either... working on downsizing my games...[/QUOTE]
It's a lot of fun. You'll get about 10 hours out of it, probably more if you seek completion, but I enjoyed almost every moment of the game.
Have not got Metroid other M yet either... working on downsizing my games...[/QUOTE]
It's a lot of fun. You'll get about 10 hours out of it, probably more if you seek completion, but I enjoyed almost every moment of the game.
bread's done