Jump to content


* - - - - 2 votes

The "Recommend me games." thread. Let's get this to one star, people! We can do it!


#31 Dezuria   Loading, please wait... CAGiversary!   969 Posts   Joined 14.7 Years Ago  

Posted 04 January 2008 - 06:37 PM

The only good games for the Wii are the ones you already know about. RE4, Zack and Wiki, Mario, Zelda, Fire Emblem.. The ratio of crap games/good games is sadly favoring the crap. I use my Wii for GC games mostly.

#32 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 04 January 2008 - 06:48 PM

The only games worth owning at this point are Mario Galaxy and Zelda. Anything else is worth a rental at most.


I'd add Metroid Prime 3 to that for sure! And RE4 if you haven't played it on another system.

#33 catapult37   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   389 Posts   Joined 13.8 Years Ago  

Posted 04 January 2008 - 07:25 PM

Yep, that's about it. You can count 'em on one hand.

After that, it's up to you to decide where to go. I got a 360 to feed my FPS cravings and have been thoroughly happy (also with the online support).

However, if you don't have a problem treading water in the blue ocean, you can get lots of fun out of some of the mini games. Raving Rabbids is totally awesome, and even Monkey Ball is fun (though not nearly as good as its GC predecessor). Warioware is also entertaining for a while, and there's Guitar Hero I guess.

I 100% agree on Zack&Wiki btw. It's a lot of fun.

#34 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 04 January 2008 - 07:44 PM

Yep, that's about it. You can count 'em on one hand.

After that, it's up to you to decide where to go. I got a 360 to feed my FPS cravings and have been thoroughly happy (also with the online support).


Same here, and the Wii60 combo has made me a very happy gamer (recent Xbox Live problems aside :bomb:).

#35 StinkyCheese   What? CAGiversary!   1087 Posts   Joined 11.5 Years Ago  

StinkyCheese

Posted 04 January 2008 - 07:48 PM

glad this thread is finally stickied. nice job Crotch, keep it updated.

#36 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 04 January 2008 - 07:50 PM

Happy happy joy joy! Now we see whether or not this does anything about these threads.

#37 StinkyCheese   What? CAGiversary!   1087 Posts   Joined 11.5 Years Ago  

StinkyCheese

Posted 04 January 2008 - 07:57 PM

Happy happy joy joy! Now we see whether or not this does anything about these threads.


sorry to dissapoint you, but I think we'll still see them. That being said, this thread will really help a lot of people, especially since a lot of people got a wii for xmas, and need advice on what games to get. If you need any help, just ask.
Spoiler


#38 Ice2Dragon   Cuckoo For Killing Stuff CAGiversary!   3427 Posts   Joined 11.8 Years Ago  

Posted 04 January 2008 - 08:03 PM

Happy happy joy joy! Now we see whether or not this does anything about these threads.


If only you knew how tempting it is for me to make anew account everyday and post "WHAT WII GAMES ARE GOOD" threads once a day...

Sigh.. college starts in 3 days...

#39 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 04 January 2008 - 08:14 PM

Come to think of it, my summers are booked up solid from here 'til the Wii 2 comes out at the very least. Unless you can get an internet connection to a helicopter-access-only clearcut, someone else will have to handle this for the summer. Then again, knowing how many games come out in the summer, it could probably just be left on its own...

#40 Ice2Dragon   Cuckoo For Killing Stuff CAGiversary!   3427 Posts   Joined 11.8 Years Ago  

Posted 05 January 2008 - 10:53 AM

How did Marvel UA get anything about 50 percent on the WII? The game is garbage, as a launch title no less.. the controls were shitty.. the camera was god awful.. and after ten minutes of playing your arm got tired cuz of all the motions you had to do..

Flawed version gets 75+ -_-V GAHHHH!!!!

#41 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 05 January 2008 - 06:02 PM

Eh. Save for a few games - specifically, those that I know Fuck all about - review scores don't really matter. They're totally arbitrary numbers that you would need a fucking Rosetta Stone to decipher. Lots of reviewers themselves say "Don't go by the numbers - just read what we wrote, okay?" Not exactly sure why they still have numbers if they insist that they matter so little, or what you do when their words suck too, as is often the case.

...

In retrospect, I'm probably not the person who should be running a thread on review scores.

Oh, and I'm putting more information in the OP in a minute.

#42 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 05 January 2008 - 06:49 PM

Eh. Save for a few games - specifically, those that I know Fuck all about - review scores don't really matter. They're totally arbitrary numbers that you would need a fucking Rosetta Stone to decipher. Lots of reviewers themselves say "Don't go by the numbers - just read what we wrote, okay?" Not exactly sure why they still have numbers if they insist that they matter so little, or what you do when their words suck too, as is often the case.



That's true for individual reviews, but aggergate scores are more useful. If a game is getting 80 or 90% or above average across 20+ reviews, you can be pretty confident you'll like it if you are a fan of that type of games.

Still really only useful for me for games I'm on the fence about, or know nothign about and check reviews after hearing it hyped on the boards or seeing a trailer etc.

But they are useful to me and I like that this thread is based around the average review scores.

#43 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 05 January 2008 - 07:10 PM

While it's true-er that combined review scores are better than individual scores, there's still the problem that they're totally arbitrary. They're good for separating crap from not crap, but I don't trust them beyond that. Kinda funny that I would base a thread around them, but whatever.

#44 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 05 January 2008 - 07:27 PM

Yeah, I use them to seperate "crap I shouldn't bother checking out" from "games I should check out."

They're of course not the end all of whether a game is good or not, or whether I'll enjoy it.

But they do help me decide what to check out with my limited gaming time and budget, and help me avoid wasting time or money on games I don't end up liking. While not the end all, they're aren't many games, in genres I like anyway, that score 90% or above that I don't end up loving.

#45 rjung   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   453 Posts   Joined 11.8 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 09:04 AM

Dunno about the rest of you guys, but I'm at a point where I have to take "professional" Wii reviews with a bag of salt. Some folks will pan a game because they don't like motion controls (Wii Sports), some folks will pan a game for bogus reasons (I had no problems with Tomb Raider despite some reviews saying the game was "broken"), and a lot of folks will harshly ding casual games just because they're -- surprise! -- not oriented towards the hardcore. I'm almost reduced to reading reviews to get the general gist of a game, but rely more on word-of-mouth recommendations from folks instead.

As it is now, I've got nearly a dozen non-VC games for my Wii, and would recommend (almost) all of them as quality titles.

--R.J.

#46 R. Kasahara   The Artist Formerly Known as ブルー神羅 CAGiversary!   4274 Posts   Joined 13.1 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 03:51 PM

rjung: I kind of have to agree there, for the most part. The most bogus reviews I've seen are the ones where they compare a Wii game's graphics and say they aren't as good as those on the 360 or PS3. Of course they aren't going to be as good, but said reviewers don't even think to take the hardware's capabilities into consideration.

#47 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 06 January 2008 - 06:35 PM

They're are some crappy Wii reviews out there. But I tend to agree with them more often than not. Esepcially the game rankings averages. Mario, Metroid and Zelda are all very high, and Super Paper Mario is decently reviewed. And those are the 4 games I've found worth buying so far (RE4 I bought the GC version before Wii port was announced).

But then again I don't dig casual games, mini games, or party games which is what tends to get hammered in reviews.

But I still take all individual reviews with a grain of salt, and again only even use the average sites when on the fence or it's a game I know nothing about.

#48 Koggit   almost sorry CAGiversary!   3886 Posts   Joined 15.5 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 06:57 PM

Reviews should just be out of four whole stars. Maybe with half-stars, if a reviewer wants to be a tool. There is absolutely no conceivable way that an objective human being can say "No, this game isn't an 8.6, it's definitely an 8.7"... even saying it's a 7.0 instead of a 6.0 is a tough call to make, if 5 is average and 10 is perfect.

If it's awful, 1 star. If it's bad, 2 stars. If it's good, 3 stars. If it's amazing, 4 stars. The end.

I wish I ruled the world...

#49 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 06 January 2008 - 07:22 PM

I can kind of get the point of having a 10.0 scale.

Take this past year, so far my favorite of 2007 list goes, in order:

Bioshock
Mario Galaxy
Call of Duty 4
Halo 3
Metroid Prime 3

On your star system, they'd all be 4 stars, but I can clearly rank them in that order.

Buy using a more detailed scale, I could give them scores which reflect my ranking of their quality. i.e. give Bioshock a 9.5, Mario Galaxy a 9.3, Call of Duty a 9.1, etc. etc.

The numbers are kind of arbitrary, but at least reflect the ranking.

#50 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 08:23 PM

Going to a four-star system would just make things worse. As arbitrary as the difference between 9.2 and 9.8 is, it's a hell of a lot better than the difference between 3/4 and 3.5/4. Besides that, we like our numbers easy to fractionalize, and 0.875 would have a lot of nerds pulling out their calculators.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: no numbers, no stars, no elementary-school-style grades (Does A+ equal 10/10, or 9.5/10?). If you need to absolutely sum something up, just give me a nice, short blurb.

"Only worth it for fans of the genre."

There. Was that so fucking hard?

"A definite buy for everyone."

Look! No more "Zelda only got an 8.6?" Or an 8.4. I can't actually remember what GS gave it. Now I admit, this uses up slightly more ink on a page, but unless there are any octopus-huggers in the room here, I don't think anyone will mind.

#51 Ice2Dragon   Cuckoo For Killing Stuff CAGiversary!   3427 Posts   Joined 11.8 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 09:01 PM

Going to a four-star system would just make things worse. As arbitrary as the difference between 9.2 and 9.8 is, it's a hell of a lot better than the difference between 3/4 and 3.5/4. Besides that, we like our numbers easy to fractionalize, and 0.875 would have a lot of nerds pulling out their calculators.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: no numbers, no stars, no elementary-school-style grades (Does A+ equal 10/10, or 9.5/10?). If you need to absolutely sum something up, just give me a nice, short blurb.

"Only worth it for fans of the genre."

There. Was that so fucking hard?

"A definite buy for everyone."

Look! No more "Zelda only got an 8.6?" Or an 8.4. I can't actually remember what GS gave it. Now I admit, this uses up slightly more ink on a page, but unless there are any octopus-huggers in the room here, I don't think anyone will mind.


nope. good job though. Always here to help ^_-

#52 Koggit   almost sorry CAGiversary!   3886 Posts   Joined 15.5 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 09:27 PM

As arbitrary as the difference between 9.2 and 9.8 is, it's a hell of a lot better than the difference between 3/4 and 3.5/4.


I usually agree with you, but not there. I think the comparison is a bit off.

First, I think a game that gets a 9.2 is likely to be either 4 stars on a whole-star system or 3 and a half on a half-star system. 9.8 is definitely a four-star game.

I think it's easier to say that four star (9.8) game is amazing and the three and a half star (9.2) is great. There's no need at all to quantify it as a numeral, leave it symbolic. It's not 87.5%, it's half a star shy of amazing.

It has worked great for movies, music, hotels, food, etc... there's no reason it wouldn't work great for games.

#53 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 06 January 2008 - 10:44 PM

I usually agree with you, but not there. I think the comparison is a bit off.

I'm sure the irony of that statement tastes delicious.

First, I think

We're getting into dangerous territory there already. That's how arbitrary scales and numbers start.

a game that gets a 9.2 is likely to be either 4 stars on a whole-star system or 3 and a half on a half-star system. 9.8 is definitely a four-star game.

The miracle of rounding agrees with you, but I must ask: what advantage is there to having less clarity? What advantage is there to saying that something is "About three out of four" versus saying "7.6 out of ten"?

I think it's easier to say that four star (9.8) game is amazing and the three and a half star (9.2) is great. There's no need at all to quantify it as a numeral, leave it symbolic. It's not 87.5%, it's half a star shy of amazing.

Ahem.

I think mathematically...

A-hem.

It has worked great for movies, music, hotels, food, etc... there's no reason it wouldn't work great for games.

The quality of a hotel is a lot easier to quantify and assign a number to than a game, movie, or piece of music. You never have to worry about how many points on a star you should deduct because "the Best Western in Saskatoon this year was pretty much identical to what it was in 2007 - talk about a lazy, rushed sequel!"

#54 Koggit   almost sorry CAGiversary!   3886 Posts   Joined 15.5 Years Ago  

Posted 07 January 2008 - 01:19 AM

The miracle of rounding agrees with you, but I must ask: what advantage is there to having less clarity? What advantage is there to saying that something is "About three out of four" versus saying "7.6 out of ten"?


Clarity? It's faux precision. It's why we have standards for significant digits. 7.63439 is not more accurate than 7.6 if the observer (reviewer) is unsure of the reading past tenths. If we need more clarity, why stop at a 100-point scale? Why not have a 1,000-point scale and rate Super Mario Galaxy 9.23? Afterall, it's certainly a higher quality game than just 9.2. But it's not quite a 9.3.

The advantage to less of this so-perceived "clarity" is that there would be less emphasis on score and more emphasis on the actual review. The final rating would be looked at only as a rough guide of quality, as is the case with other forms of critiquing and as it should be with video games.


The quality of a hotel is a lot easier to quantify and assign a number to than a game, movie, or piece of music. You never have to worry about how many points on a star you should deduct because "the Best Western in Saskatoon this year was pretty much identical to what it was in 2007 - talk about a lazy, rushed sequel!"


While true, that doesn't detract from the worth of my statement.

#55 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 07 January 2008 - 01:41 AM

Clarity? It's faux precision. It's why we have standards for significant digits. 7.63439 is not more accurate than 7.6 if the observer (reviewer) is unsure of the reading past tenths. If we need more clarity, why stop at a 100-point scale? Why not have a 1,000-point scale and rate Super Mario Galaxy 9.23? Afterall, it's certainly a higher quality game than just 9.2. But it's not quite a 9.3.

The advantage to less of this so-perceived "clarity" is that there would be less emphasis on score and more emphasis on the actual review. The final rating would be looked at only as a rough guide of quality, as is the case with other forms of critiquing and as it should be with video games.

Then why not go all the way? If you don't want to deal with numbers out of ten million or letters from A+++ to F- or what "ten anal rapists out of fifty two anal rapists" means, then why bother with stars? If four stars means "This is a fantastic game!", why not just have the final rating say: "This is fantastic game!"?

While true, that doesn't detract from the worth of my statement.

I think that was one of those agree to disagree bits, actually, but whatever. Except for the hotels - they just plain don't fit.


Way to work sig figs into a post, by the way.

#56 daminion   Bah CAGiversary!   2498 Posts   Joined 13.0 Years Ago  

Posted 07 January 2008 - 03:41 PM

Good post, couple of comments and 1 correction

Correction:

Excite Truck - 75% - Great fun, but limited options. Spiritual successor of Excite Truck Bike, but I don't think it has the beloved track editor of its NES predecessor. Multiplayer is only for two people.



Comment:

Mortal Kombat: Armaggeddon - 72.9% - Dunno much about this fighter. Multiplayer's a given in it, though it is not online.


Only thing to add here is that this version of MK is probably the easiest I've ever played. The Wii controls make performing complex special moves and fatalities easy.


Also, I'd like to see this expanded to as many Wii release titles as we can. Many of us have kids and even though we would probably never play Chicken Little or Disney's Princess Adventures ourselves, our kids would. And when buying titles for little ones it's nice to know which ones are actually fun for kids and which are just too hard.

I'll add this title since we rented it and my kids loved it.

Posted Image
Disney Princess: Enchanted Journey
Great title for young children. It has 2 player coop, no online. It's a very easy 3rd person adventure / platformer. Gamers are rewarded with an animted cut scenes after they complete each section. I was personally impressed with the graphics, I was expecting very poor graphics but the game looks really good. The game is overally very short, my son (6) and daughter (4) beat it in coop mode in about 6 hours.

#57 dmaul1114   Banned Banned   24688 Posts   Joined 14.5 Years Ago  

dmaul1114

Posted 07 January 2008 - 06:19 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: no numbers, no stars, no elementary-school-style grades (Does A+ equal 10/10, or 9.5/10?). If you need to absolutely sum something up, just give me a nice, short blurb.

"Only worth it for fans of the genre."

There. Was that so fucking hard?


What's wrong with having numbers and short blurbs? i.e. IGN has numbers, a long review, and a nice short sum up at the end.

EGM used to be very good about having short blurbs as well. They still are sometimes, but too often waste their words with reviewers arguing with each other etc.

#58 The Crotch   There are ten sticks of dynamite waiting for you. CAGiversary!   14940 Posts   Joined 12.9 Years Ago  

Posted 07 January 2008 - 10:11 PM

What's wrong with having numbers and short blurbs? i.e. IGN has numbers, a long review, and a nice short sum up at the end.

EGM used to be very good about having short blurbs as well. They still are sometimes, but too often waste their words with reviewers arguing with each other etc.

My point/assertion is that the numbers do absolutely nothing but distract from the review itself.

Correction:

Fuck.

Comment:


Only thing to add here is that this version of MK is probably the easiest I've ever played. The Wii controls make performing complex special moves and fatalities easy.

Will add that.

Also, I'd like to see this expanded to as many Wii release titles as we can. Many of us have kids and even though we would probably never play Chicken Little or Disney's Princess Adventures ourselves, our kids would. And when buying titles for little ones it's nice to know which ones are actually fun for kids and which are just too hard.

I'll add this title since we rented it and my kids loved it.

Posted Image
Disney Princess: Enchanted Journey
Great title for young children. It has 2 player coop, no online. It's a very easy 3rd person adventure / platformer. Gamers are rewarded with an animted cut scenes after they complete each section. I was personally impressed with the graphics, I was expecting very poor graphics but the game looks really good. The game is overally very short, my son (6) and daughter (4) beat it in coop mode in about 6 hours.

I'll add this one, but I won't enjoy adding it.

#59 blackbird3216   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   1465 Posts   Joined 11.8 Years Ago  

blackbird3216

Posted 21 January 2008 - 10:42 PM

I just got my first Wii Points card and im wondering what i should get. Im thinking SM64 ,Super Mario World and Lost Levels. Never played the Metroid titles(except for prime 3), they just seemed to freaky for me. ;)

What are some "must-have" titles on the VC right now? Im assuming the upcoming Super Smash Bros is one of them, right?

#60 Zen Davis   Banned Banned   5911 Posts   Joined 13.9 Years Ago  

Zen Davis

Posted 21 January 2008 - 10:46 PM

Get some new stuff.

Beyond Oasis
Star Tropics
The Legend of The Mystical Ninja