[quote name='pochaccoheaven']are you crazy?! how is the bad visuals nintendo's part? [/quote]
Nintendo has a well documented history of denying all the technical information on their consoles in order to wring out the best capabilities. On top of that, in the past they have had regulations that basically forbade third parties from releasing multiple games at once - no doubt to make themselves to look better.
Additionally, while the Wii (and probably the Gamecube, but I'm not 100% sure, just going by with the idea that both systems are architecturally similar) does contain the ability to pull off some nice effects,
it is not hardwired in. This is especially true with shaders - you can make it happen, but you've got to work some fancy programming magic to get it done. This is why people will commonly say the Wii can't do it - because it forces a developer to wrangle with the machine's innards. I don't know much about programming, but I do know that would be like translating a book from Latin into Japanese, when all you know is English.
conduit isn't being helped by nintendo and the people who are making it are doing actual development and learning about the system as they go through it.
See above. High Voltage is not even remotely comparable to the rest of the third party community right now. And they are undergoing some serious sweat to make their game look good. Back at E3, an Ubisoft exec approached them and said they could "crap the game out by Christmas for twenty bucks a pop." Meaning if HVS just did the bare minimum, the game could have been finished a while ago.
This is (again) compounded with the difficulty of Nintendo being staunchly quiet about how to unlock the power of their system.
it is similarly to what factor 5 did for the n64. no other company during the n64 days spent the time and research for developing for the n64. when factor 5 came out with rogue squadron and the other star wars game, they not only shocked nintendo but all the other dumb ass developers who said it was impossible to achieve such possibilities.
Again - one dire exception to the rule doesn't mean much. Nintendo is kind of digging this grave themselves by not really forcing developers to try harder. It's often cited that this is the reason why the "Seal of Nintendo" changed, where the "Quality" was dropped. Basically the argument is that Nintendo will let anything through the door at this point, so long as it boots correctly.
In other words - Nintendo has almost zero quality control. This is especially alarming to the Nintendo fan when you consider that most companies are very obviously using the Wii's current popculture status to sell gobs of trash, which they then turn around to fund big projects on the HD Twins.
it is also not nintendo's fault for not stopping the sales of this game. nintendo has no right to decide what should be passed for sale on their consoles or not.
They can and they have in the past, and honestly, they should probably start putting a bigger foot down these days. True, were they to suddenly start not allowing tons of shovelware, that might be considered Draconian and outmoded. But to pretend that it's somehow "good" that we get Billy Boomstick's Race of Shit is just laughable.
Reggie just earned himself a boatload of fire when he said that he didn't want to release Disaster in the states because he felt it wasn't worth it. The game might not be top material, but to pretend that something like it is getting canned in favor of High School Musical 3 makes my head hurt. And since Reggie is basically THE big man on campus, when HE starts talking that way, I get a little concerned.
They already gimped Metroid Prime 3 - arguably one of the top 3 games on the system - by basically refusing to advertise it. That's a bad damn sign when you consider the game A) is the perfect choice for showing off some of the Wiimote's capabilities, and B) came from a second party (Retro).
if a game company wants to make games on the wii, why should nintendo stop them regardless if the game will suck or not.
Because if my entire library goes from Mario/Zelda straight to bullshit city, then my console of choice gets less attention from third parties (who already like to whine about their games not selling against Nintendo's own efforts). If that goes on for a while, we end up right back where we started with the N64/Gamecube - a total lack of worthwhile releases.
this tells you that there is less investments in the game itself other then to earn money. if they really wanted this game to be really good, they would have put more time into it.
Not if they want a quick cash-in on a system with a large userbase. Especially if the user-base is full of idiots and soccer moms who might gobble this trash up because they have no concept of a good game.
Even if it had stellar sales, Activision won't take the hint as "we should put more quality software out on the Wii." They'll think "Look at people buying that shit, we spent 300 bucks making it. ....Get a sequel out next month."
look at goldeneye, it was delayed and became a better game. it seems quite a cliche that the game is still in fps. it's been 10 years or so since goldeneye for n64.
Ok, just because these are both Bond-themed games doesn't make them comparable. Goldeneye came from the golden days of Rare, and was groundbreaking at the time. This game on the Wii looks like trash and is trash.
don't you think it's time for a change. remember that change is difficult but will prove worthy of survival.
Yeah - I wish there were concentrated efforts by the big third parties on my console. But it aint happenin' now and I doubt it's going to change. At this point Activision and Ubisoft are learning that they can release total nonsense and STILL make profits.
now you know why there aren't so many third party games, why third party games fail and why you have these simple clones on the wii because developers aren't putting time and effort, basically development, into the game like how it was in the past. this is the reason why there are so few titles for the wii.
That's oversimplification. There's few titles for a huge boatload of reasons, but I'm not going to go into them. It doesn't change the fact that third parties aren't releasing their big titles on the Wii, and tend to think the entire console is going to die out any day now (even though there's been 2 years of contradictory evidence to that).
so don't blame nintendo for the wii having a small library, blame the third party companies like ubisoft, ea, activision, etc.... btw, ever wonder why there are more support for 360/ps3 then wii?
You know, at this point, you clearly have no idea who you are talking to.
why no exclusives because you'd actually have to invest in development for wii as they have the most users while the 360/ps3 didn't require any development.
You're wrong. It probably takes more development for 360/PS3. Look at MGS4, Gears of War, Halo, etc for proof. It's not hard to spot it.
so to compensate, developers break the exclusive idea and release games for both systems to try to earn money from the hardcore.
And they seem pretty happy doing that for the most part, save for the exclusives here and there.
themselves into the ground.
