News Article

Developers: Wii U "Less Powerful than PS3 and 360"

Posted by James Newton

Is it, isn't it?

Welcome once again to the best game show on the internet, How Powerful is Wii U?

While recently Darksiders II developer Vigil Games said Wii U is "on par" with current generation consoles, now a band of anonymous developers have spoken out to Games Industry.biz about the machine's power, claiming it's not got quite as much grunt as its current opposition.

One anonymous developer said:

No, it's not up to the same level as the PS3 or the 360. The graphics are just not as powerful.

Which was backed up by a second, also anonymous dev:

Yeah, that's true. It doesn't produce graphics as well as the PS3 or the 360. There aren't as many shaders, it's not as capable. Sure, some things are better, mostly as a result of it being a more modern design. But overall the Wii U just can't quite keep up.

Nintendo's stayed away from talking about Wii U tech specs so far, but that hasn't stopped developers and industry figures from piping up with their own takes: we've heard that Wii U is 50% more powerful than PS3, twice as powerful as Xbox 360 and now we're hearing that it's not as powerful as either. Our prediction for the next Wii U power quote? "Wii U Not as Powerful as Wii."

[via gamesindustry.biz]

More Stories

User Comments (609)

Omenapoika

#1

Omenapoika said:

"The graphical capacity of Wii U is 1,7 gamecubes + an android phone, according to the latest tests. Former understanding of 0,3 Xbox360s + three quarters of macbook pro is still causing some misunderstandings."
-emeritus developer

StrawHatChopper

#2

StrawHatChopper said:

Until E3 begins, we won't know for certain how powerful this machine really is. With so many bits of info from various named devs (Ubisoft, Gearbox, etc) stating otherwise, though, it's hard to take the word of a couple of anonymous individuals from an unknown "major developer".

WiiLovePeace

#6

WiiLovePeace said:

Hahahahaha the last sentence was win. I doubt the words of those 'anonymous' people, that could be anyone! We'll just have to wait & see 'til E3 I guess. Nintendo would be pretty dumb not to trounce the competition for power in their system right now, though if the PS4/720 really do need a constant internet connection & there are no used games possible, then I'm gonna be sticking with the Wii U next gen.

Cipher

#8

Cipher said:

Yeah, we already know from notable developers that Wii U is more powerful than the X360 and PS3. These people are just trying to cause trouble.

Pokefanmum82

#9

Pokefanmum82 said:

I don't believe some people who won't say who they are and what company they work for. I will wait until e3 thank you very much.

XCWarrior

#11

XCWarrior said:

GOing to wait until E3 for final judgement, but if this is true... no reason to buy the system. Considering Sony/MIcrosoft will have new systems outs in 2013, this would be beyond dumb for Nintendo to do something like this.

HiroshiYamauchi

#12

HiroshiYamauchi said:

@Cipher
Yes, this is very suspicious, looking at the Zelda and bird demos from the last year's E3, they look, at least, on par with everything i saw on the PS3 or the XBOX 360.

Kyloctopus

#13

Kyloctopus said:

It would be funny if these anonymous developers were from Rare.
But seriously, as long as they have great content, it's radical with me.

RVN

#15

RVN said:

So an anon appears from nowhere and he suddenly become front page on several videogame news sites.
What the hell is going on?

Burning_Spear

#16

Burning_Spear said:

Those quotes don't sound like actual quotes. The "graphics are just not as powerful"? No tech guy would say that.

Almost everything else we've heard has Wii U being at least as powerful, if not much more powerful, than the current HD consoles. I think this a hoax, a bunch of blather or both.

TheChosen

#17

TheChosen said:

Someone else posted this on GoNintendo, which I think describes this news the best:

"Anonymous devs: Not as powerful.
Vigil/Gearbox/Ubisoft devs: More powerful."

Shworange

#18

Shworange said:

That just wouldn't makes sense! Why would that be the case when Nintendo knows the other companies will release even more powerful consoles? It makes the 3DS launch look like a blip on the radar!

Shotgunryugan

#19

Shotgunryugan said:

I don't care for the graphics.

What i care about is the quality of the gameplay/music/controls in each game,that is what's most important.

Besides lower graphics doesn't make a game bad,look at VVVVVV,one of the best games on any system in my opinion.

TruenoGT

#20

TruenoGT said:

There's also been talk of different revisions, with the hardware progressively getting better each time. Perhaps these devs are using older revisions.

ejamer

#23

ejamer said:

DOOOOOMED! o_O

People don't hand out quotes like these without some vested interest or agenda, doubly true when they remain anonymous. So which development studio do these devs belong to, and why are they so confident that PS3/Vita development is easier and more capable than Wii U? That's left as an exercise for the reader.

So far, most developers are making statements that contradict this report. I'll wait and see instead of getting excited either way.

Cia

#24

Cia said:

This is just a made up rumor. But if it were true, i would not buy Wii-U. I don't need another console which is on par or worse than the PS3 i already have. A gimmicky controller or another Zelda game doesn't make up for it, unless they revolutionize these things somehow unimaginably.

DogNut327

#26

DogNut327 said:

Believe anonymous "developers," or several well-known, respected developers who are confirmed to have the dev kit and are planning on releasing Wii U games in the future.

I wonder which.

warioswoods

#27

warioswoods said:

The news has been all over the map on this thing, so I wouldn't jump to conclusions.

That being said, I'm sure that Nintendo will be following the Wii's line of thinking and will try to have the all-around cheapest console of the upcoming generation, without quite as much horsepower as the others. And I prefer that, to be honest; they should focus more on what makes the console distinct (that controller and its gameplay possibilities) and leave the arms race to others.

AddADashOfSalt

#30

AddADashOfSalt said:

Anonymous developers are? Maybe Microsoft and Sony? Also, this just SOUNDS like a bunch of crap. All the other devs are happy and saying it has a ton of power, but 2 devs partnered up, or are the same developer, and are trying to avert attention away from Wii U. I mean, look, does it even SOUND like they are telling the truth? Its past time for saying this, they just want attention. But I'm telling you, until it's leaked, those developers will NEVER say their names or companies for fear of almost immediate death of their business.

ajcismo

#32

ajcismo said:

With the bad pub Sony and Microsoft are getting on their next consoles these days, it seems pretty fortunate timing that suddenly anonymous devs are just stepping forward to downgrade their competitions specs. And I thought only governments do this sort of diversion tactic.

Ducutzu

#33

Ducutzu said:

I will never forget the stream of rumors before the reveal of Wii U at E3. One such "reliable source" said that the Wii U uses haptic technology - where the touch screen would appear in relief to the touch... Yeah right...

tagz

#35

tagz said:

Mmm. learn from the older hardware, I believe Wii U is not powerful as the other console. But Im happy with my 3DS.

misswliu81

#36

misswliu81 said:

the truth will come out at E3 by nintendo themselves and when it does, i will find out. the wii U has to be more powerful than the wii and i'd be fine with that, never mind be as powerful as PS3, 360.

at the end of the day, it is the games and third party support that does justice to a console. so far, nintendo have got some really interesting titles: darksiders, toki tori, aliens, assassins creed to name.

so it's not power, it's games that matter for me, and the more quality games on show, then the better.

irrespective of how less powerful the wii U could be.

C-Olimar

#37

C-Olimar said:

'Wii U not as powerful as NES'
It seems to me like all the major developers say that it is at least on par with current consoles, with many saying it is more powerful, so these 'anonymous developers are likely talking bubbles.

steamhare

#38

steamhare said:

Since they mentioned shaders, I'm inclined to believe the developers, since I was under the impression that nintendo's consoles didn't use conventional shaders. If a developer uses them as a measure of a console's "power", then nintendo consoles will come out behind even with incredibly powerful hardware, since the developer is probably talking about the power of the readily available graphics tools instead of what they can crank out with years and years of development experience.

snigel1

#39

snigel1 said:

If Wii U will be on par or even below the competitions last generation, and if they continue to threat Wii VC the way they do… i might consider dropping my brand loyalty.

It's just not worth it investing in a new console only to get a new Mario Kart and a Mario platformer...

Marios-love-child

#40

Marios-love-child said:

I'm 99% certain quotes like this are aload of nonsense so wouldnt be too worried. Probably just sectret agents for Sony & Microsoft trying to put off potential customers

However hypotheticly speaking if they were to be true then there really is no point to Nindendo's new console at all and I wont be buying one

BenAV

#41

BenAV said:

We'll just have to wait and see to find out just how powerful it is.
Personally, I don't really care that much.
I'm sure it'll be powerful enough to keep me happy.
Hopefully most third party developers will feel the same way. :P

BrainBoxLtd

#42

BrainBoxLtd said:

You heard them*, with the Wii U "The graphics are just not as powerful". You know the graphics, that thing people put in their game consoles. Very technical term, that's how you know these people are legitimate...

Seriously, the all "powerful" 360 and the PS3 came out 7 and 6 years ago respectively. This may come as a shock, but neither one of them has been cutting edge for years. It doesn't mean they're not capable of producing some dazzling effects, but try to remember it's all being done on dated hardware that's almost as old as YouTube itself. That's why they're both are so affordable now.

At this point Nintendo would probably have to deliberately go outta their way to produce a home console significantly weaker then the two that have been out for over half a decade. Just like how you would have to go outta of your way to find a computer built in 2012 that is significantly weaker than a computer made in 2006.

FonistofCruxis

#43

FonistofCruxis said:

I highly doubt Nintendo are stupid enough to release a console less powerful than the PS3/360 when the successors will probably be out in a year or two which will be even more powerful. Also, we've had quite a few high profile devs saying that its either just as powerful as the PS3/360 or (significantly) more powerful than them so I don't see how two anonymous devs are trustworthy.

Whopper744

#44

Whopper744 said:

Nintendo's games and franchises will always be better then thier competitors in my opinion. The problem is, a lot of people look at the graphics and FPS of the other systems, and think that since they look prettier and more realistic, they are the best choice of system, therefore making Nintendo lose out on that sale. It really doesn't matter to me much, but if Nintendo would keep up a little better with the specs of the other systems, I would think they could really kick some butt. Particular with the Online functions.

geozeldadude

#45

geozeldadude said:

i know i can't be the only one sick of these pointless rumors. why bother reporting this crap? just wait until the official specs come out, and stop believing "anonymous" reports.

SteveW

#46

SteveW said:

The comments are from Xbox 360 or PS3 fanboys who are angry that they now have to develop for a Nintendo console

Nintendoftw

#47

Nintendoftw said:

This isn't just a rumor anymore... Tons of developers are pretty much saying the same thing... Which is :The Wii will NOT keep up with the next gen consoles just as it was this gen.

If Nintendo pulls this crap again then I am officially no longer a NIntendo fan. I have went with it last gen but NOT two gens in a row. And the thing about this is that Nintendo being a gen behind even the last gen consoles isn't uncommon! The Wii was less powerful than the original Xbox.

Nintendoftw

#48

Nintendoftw said:

And it seems that you guys have no idea what technical specs means for a system. POWER is the only thing that will distinguish the Wii U from the Wii. And the only thing that will make the Wii U "next gen".

James

#49

James said:

@Nintendoftw "POWER is the only thing that will distinguish the Wii U from the Wii."

Apart from that whopping new controller and all.

Nintendoftw

#50

Nintendoftw said:

The new controller is trash. I have to say it. I have do the exact same thing with a PSVita and a PS3. Nintendo should get smart and drop that garbage in place for 3DS/Wii U connectivity similar to sony's remote play. Some may call it stealing ideas that that's what keeps the gaming industry competitive

Unca_LzStaff

#51

Unca_Lz said:

I can take a few guesses on why they wanted to remain anonymous. They are actually Sony and Microsoft :D

@Nintendoftw: Why not have both? :) Also, yes, the controller is trash. I'm sure you have tried the final product to back up your verdict ;)

Nintendoftw

#52

Nintendoftw said:

@Lordlz The idea in general is terrible...And the Wii U having the same controller as the Wii...? The Wii U will fail in impressing REAL nintendo fans if they continue on like this. They've failed us once with the WIi, and if any of you don't think the WIi was a failure either you've never played a PS3/360 (OR EVEN A PSP... Even it's games are on par with the Wiis') or you're just not a fan at all, just a blind fanboy. I am proud of NIntendo for their success with the 3DS but they are doing horrible in terms of impressing fans with the Wii, and it seems the Wii U will only be an extension of that garbage

Randomname19

#53

Randomname19 said:

I don't really care about this stuff,I just want good games like the ones that made me say "Screw the HD graphics,those games are awesome" when I was gonig to buy a new console.

3dbrains

#54

3dbrains said:

I know a fair few game devs from 2 huge and one small companies -
I can not - and will not share any info with you:-
which is why I know, and they know, this is not true.
But I can promise you one thing...
WiiU has more 'power' than Chuck Norris.
You are all going to be happy in a few months.

SteveW

#55

SteveW said:

@Nintendoftw: "If Nintendo pulls this crap again then I am officially no longer a NIntendo fan"

umm... you don't sound like a Nintendo fan anyway. The controller is not trash and will bring a whole new experience to gaming. I believe the Wii U will be an amazing system and definitely be more powerful than those two developers make it sound because I've seen comments from other developers saying that it was. Anyway, power does not make a great game, if graphics are the only thing you are concerned about then go watch a blu-ray movie or something...

TrueWiiMaster

#56

TrueWiiMaster said:

Anyone else find it odd that the developers who say the Wii U is great are well known, and not anonymous, and the "developers" who say it's weak hide their identities? I wouldn't be surprised if these guys never touched the Wii U dev kits, or maybe... these quotes came directly from Microsoft and Sony themselves!

James

#57

James said:

Or maybe the people who speak on-record are afraid that Nintendo will revoke their dev kits if they say "it's not that powerful" so they're puffing it up.

Just a thought.

BrainBoxLtd

#58

BrainBoxLtd said:

@Nintendoftw: "If Nintendo pulls this crap again then I am officially no longer a NIntendo fan."

I got good news then. They have pulled this crap** again. You are no longer a Nintendo fan. You're now free to spend time at sites devoted to things you are a fan of.

With the power vested in me as a Nintendo Fanboy***, I hereby release you from all contractually mandated duties as a Nintendo Fan, now and forever. Go in peace my child.

(**Crap being defined as releasing a home console with a unique controller and graphical prowess equal to or slightly greater than previous generation of home consoles.)
(***Nintendo Fanboy being defined as one who owns a 360, PS3, or PSP and does not consider the Wii as a failure.)

Mikau94

#59

Mikau94 said:

Let's get our term straight. Power doesn't mean graphics. The Wii-U is more powerful than the 360 and PS3 but it may not have the graphic capablities of them. From what I've heard the system could run a 360 or PS3 game just fine and you would hardly be able to tell the difference. There won't be any problems as long as the system runs 720p.

Also, Nintendo should use blu-rays. They would lose a dollar or 2 in manufacturing, but they would make all that back when their games aren't pirated as easily.

VincentV

#60

VincentV said:

I don't buy this. Sure the Wii U will be weaker than the PS4, etc., but I don't think it will be by much. Why are these "devs" (are these guys from Sony?) not showing their identity. They obviously want publicity, or even worse, are competitors playing dirty. Second, if that's true, then why does Vigil games say it's slightly more powerful, and Epic & Crytek say it's much more powerful. That doesn't add up. I believe Epic, Crytek, and Vigil games on this one. Not to mention, these might be underclocked prototypes. Nintendo may not be letting Vigil use their prototype's full potential yet. That would explain all these claims.

AVahne

#61

AVahne said:

Utter bananas.
I'd rather take the words of actual developers who have already officially gone out and said what they think about the Wii U instead of anonymous sources. If those anonymous "developers" turned out to be actual devs, I'm willing to bet that they have some of the oldest Wii U dev kits. It just doesn't match up with what actual developers have said.

AVahne

#62

AVahne said:

@Cipher
Either that, or the dev kits they have are dinosaurs compared to the newer dev kits that the more notable developers have.

AVahne

#63

AVahne said:

@Koops3
He said that the art style will probably be different from the demo. He never said anything about the actual game looking worse.

TrueWiiMaster

#64

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
First of all, Nintendo had console-to-portable connectivity long before the Sony did. Second of all your idea of what impresses "REAL" Nintendo fans is seriously flawed. Generally Nintendo fans put quality of gameplay over looks (not that Nintendo lacks in the looks category; the Wii was the first of their consoles to be graphically behind the competition). I've played both the 360 and PS3 and was disappointed by both. Before you call me a fanboy, know that I loved both the PS1 and PS2. Both had huge, varied libraries of games. The HD systems of this generation have little on offer that doesn't involve shooting. The Wii, without a doubt, has the most varied catalog of games for this gen. With shooters, platformers, RPGs, adventure games, fighters, and racers all covered, plus a retro revival with games like Punch Out!, New Super Mario Bros, and Donkey Kong Country Returns. Add in the extensive Virtual Console selection and you have the kind of system any "REAL" Nintendo fan dreams about.

In case you'd like to make an argument for yourself, what longtime franchises did Nintendo fail to make impressive on the Wii?

Also, where are these "tons of developers" who say the Wii U is weak? Are there more of them than there are developers who say it's powerful?

Linky_97

#66

Linky_97 said:

This is bananas! Who should you belive? An anonymous dev or Capcom, Gearbox, Ubisoft, Vigil and EA who all say that its much better and more powerful!

hamae

#67

hamae said:

@Nintendoftw LOL. Nintendo tried it already (@GC+GBA), simply no developer would do game for this set up. So Nintendo didn't promote WIi+DS even with the huge install base. My 2 cents: PS3+Vita will not do well. A tablet/display that comes out the box day one is the only solution.

Alienfish

#68

Alienfish said:

Has anyone else seriously been paying attention to the progression of this kind of news? Last E3 we were blown away. Next, reports/rumors start coming in on how the WiiU is a good deal more powerful than Xbox 360 and PS3. Slowly we start to see rumors that it is as powerful and now less powerful. This could easily be Nintendo's own doing.

Nintendo wants to hit us all hard at E3 this year; totally blow us away. If everyone already knows what the console can do then how are they going to blow us away? I think Nintendo is planting these rumors to offset peoples' opinions about how powerful the system will be to keep people off balance. Of course, if I'm right, then WiiU is going to be one mad powerhouse of a console because that's the clincher, that is what they're going to be hitting us with is amazing visuals and they don't want us to be ready for it.

shonenjump86

#69

shonenjump86 said:

Guess we just have to wait till E3 gets here and we will see for ourselves. I just hope Nintendo puts up a good show and has strong third party support.

SuperNictendo

#72

SuperNictendo said:

I really do agree with wariowoods. Although more power would be neat I think innovation is gonna be key in this console instead of just power.

Nintendoftw

#73

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Obviously you don't actually HAVE a PS3/360. I have bought every NIntendo system that came after the snes... EVERY SINGLE ONE. I have loved Nintendo ever since, and then they release this garbage called the Wii... Do you understand just how much of a failure it is? Oh and varied gaming categories? This makes it obvious that you don't have a current gen system. 45% of the Wii's games are meant for little kids and almost every game that you try to name that is comparable with current gen standards is TRASH (with the exception of any first party game). Mad World is garbage and I have better games than that on my Xbox/PS2... The Conduit is generic garbage. Does the Wii have Red Dead Redemption? Dead Space 2? GTA IV? ALL of these games are very unique. Even games like Battlefield 3/MW3 are unique, I can say this because I HAVE battlefield 3 and have played MW3. You can't judge any system until you have both experiences. I have them, and I can say the Wii is complete garbage. It is NOTHING like the traditional Nintendo game consoles like the N64 or even the gamecube. And it's hilarious because the Wii is weaker than the Xbox, heck the Wii is weaker than the netbook i'm wirting this comment on right now... It's processor is only 1.5 GHZ and ROFL the wii is also weaker than my PC from the year 2002... It's processor is clocked at 2.4 ghz.... It's ridiculous. and YES processing power matters a lot. In police chase in say GTA IV... Would you rather have really good AI cops that there could be 15-20 of them on screen at once.. Or bad AI cops who you can only have 5-6 on screen?

James

#75

James said:

@Alienfish We welcome all users here — if people want to criticise Nintendo, as long as they do it in a constructive and family-friendly fashion, that's fine with us. We don't expect every user to agree with every decision Nintendo makes; that's just not realistic. Clearly @Nintendoftw is a Nintendo fan (look at that username!) but isn't fond of Wii and Wii U.

Ultimately, dudes and dudettes, the most important lesson in video games — as in life — is this: do what you want and don't care what others think. You like PS3? Awesome, play PS3 and enjoy it! Love Wii? Great, have fun. Xbox player? Rack up that Gamerscore and be entertained.

Cia

#76

Cia said:

@Nintendoftw
If the Wii-U is less powerful than PS3 and 360, i'm with you and skip the system, cause i'm tired of bad ports from 3rd parties. Anyways, it really doesn't matter if the Wii had bad specs, since it still had the best games in some genres: Xenoblade (RPG), Super Mario Galaxy (Platformer), Skyward Sword/ Twilight Princess (action adventurer), Mario Kart Wii (kart racer). I own the Ps3 and it just doesn't have anything which can compete in quality of the experience.

theblackdragonAdmin

#78

theblackdragon said:

Remember: we welcome everyone here at Nintendo Life, whether you are a fan of Nintendo or not, so long as you're contributing to the conversation at hand. If everyone agreed with everyone else and liked only the same things, this would be a pretty dull place to hang out :3

mamp

#80

mamp said:

@Nintendoftw I understand where your coming from, I mean every game Nintendo made on the Wii was awesome, but the Wii as a whole was disappointing. I mean it was underpowered compared to the other systems, its online capabilities were horrible, developers gave up on it, it was the number 1 console for shovelware, there was a point where we would have to wait months just to get a new game for the Wii, and other than Nintendo there were only a few developers that actually put any effort to make amazing games for the Wii. Yeah I understand why you're mad you're saying things what some of us are thinking you're just saying it in an angrier tone. I mean I know I'm 21 and I love Nintendo games but I like other games too and sometimes I feel like playing something with a little blood, violence, and foul language (because I'm old enough, young people don't play these games until your old enough) but Nintendo is usually the console where you won't find many of these games so that tends to be a problem for me (and yes I've played Madworld,NMH which I totally love but what else is there). BTW people being a fan doesn't mean you have to be blind either, a lot of the writers here are fans of Nintendo but it doesn't mean they're blind fanboys who can't admit when Nintendo screwed up and that's why I love Nintendolife.

WiiULoveSquid

#81

WiiULoveSquid said:

I live in a Nintendo bubble otherwise known as the mushroom kingdom. I don't see graphics I can only see fun and happy colors o_o mmm happy bubble..mushrooms..

Multishanks

#82

Multishanks said:

I wish I could bottle up all these comments and nay saying until E3, but alas I don't have the memory on my computer. The truth is, the wii was perhaps, underpowered, but definitely NOT under-designed. The main reason why it disappointed a lot of gamers, was the fact that they didn't get a lot of multiplats on the system, which is partially due to the lack of graphical capabilities of the system. The other reason is the third party developers counted out Nintendo before the system was even out. So they didn't even try to design games for the wii.They placed their bets on the Xbox 360 and to a lesser extent the PS3, and missed the majority of the industry's market-share. Taking this into account, people shouldn't be only jaded by Nintendo's efforts but, moreso the direction the industry took this generation.

TrueWiiMaster

#83

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You're right that I don't personally own either HD system, but I've played dozens of hours on the 360 in Modern Warfare and Halo, and admittedly less on the PS3. Even so, I have sufficient experience with major games on both platforms, and plenty enough information on their game libraries to be disappointed. And it's not just me. My brother has played hundreds of hours on both of the systems and also thinks the Wii is best for gameplay and variety.

Did you read your last post? The Wii can't be called varied because it has many E games? Seriously? Does that mean the PS3 and 360 have almost zero variety because most of the games worth getting on either system are rated M? Or were you actually saying that adults can't enjoy 45% of the games on the Wii because they're too childish? I'm pretty sure that's wrong... I'm an adult, and I've enjoyed quite a few games on the Wii, many rated E.

If power is so important that a system lacking sufficient strength can be called a failure, then doesn't that mean that every game before this generation is virtually unplayable? If the Wii is terrible because it sports Gamecube graphics on some games (certainly not all), then doesn't that mean that playing actual Gamecube games in this modern day would be an awful experience? And what about old N64 games? Power's not everything. It might make a game bigger, allow for better graphics, and put more enemies on screen at once, but it has absolutely no relevance on real gameplay. If it did, modern games would be massively better than old ones, but that's not the case.

You claim that almost every game on the Wii is trash compared to PS3/360 games, with the exception of 1st party titles, but there are some problems with that. First of all, the PS3/360 have almost no 1st party titles of their own, tending to focus on 3rd parties, while Nintendo excels at 1st party support. In other words it's unfair to exclude Nintendo's own games when discussing the Wii. Secondly, the Wii has more than a few 3rd party exclusives that, while not as popular, can equate quality-wise to the hits of the HD systems: Monster Hunter Tri, Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, Little King's Story, Sonic Colors, Red Steel 2, Boom Blox, Muramasa, Zack and Wiki, Trauma Center, and A Boy and His Blob. That's not all of them, but some of the best. Notice two things about that list: 1. there are more than a couple games on that list that have no counterpart on the HD systems period, and 2. it offers at least 5 different genres of excellent games. How's that for variety? Add to that the 1st party games and you have a system that can be called anything but a failure.

Do the PS3/360 have Super Smash Bros? Do they have Donkey Kong Country Returns? How about Skyward Sword? Super Mario Galaxy? No? How about some HD counterparts? None of those either? ALL of these games are very unique.

BTW, how can you get a more traditional game than a side-scroller played with the Wii remote held NES style?

P.S.- There is a Dead Space on the Wii, Modern Warfare 1 and 3 were both released on the Wii, and the Conduit is no more generic than Halo or COD.

nfzeta007

#84

nfzeta007 said:

@Faron Definitely this, that's the reason i will find it hard to not give Nintendo a chance in any Generation, as no matter what nonsense the 3rd party developers do (Wii is a GREAT example with all the shovel ware and bad ports) i still can't let go of the 1st party titles, i agree that people may be downplaying the PS3 (never EVER touched a Microsoft console) as it has Devil May Cry (although its more riding on the story than anything), Uncharted (never played it but talk says enough), GTR IV (loved it), COD (killing time, not really anything interesting here), BF3 (new to the series so this is a good change of pace from COD), Ratchet and Clank (pretty good, it definitely is fun), Skyrim etc

However even with those good games named which are among the best the PS3 had/has, i still think none of them reach the level of quality a Nintendo first party gives you, they just lack that feeling of a complete and/or unique game that Nintendo brings (even though the story keeps the same characters it actually varies with each installment of a series, especially for Metroid)
After all people i doubt any game that is an exclusive for PS3 or Xbox could have moved as many units in a bad situation like the Wii was in like Skyward Sword did (500k units in a couple weeks JUST for that game, after all the incoming J-RPGS were not on the menu as yet)
Therefore its usually a Nintendo console and a Sony console for me, (never paying for an online like xbox live especially since it charges and then still makes money off of adds and now with the manditory online for the next-gen this basically means you add on the price of xbox live onto every xbox you buy)

edhe

#85

edhe said:

The question is, will the third party developers slum it on a weaker Nintendo console, just because it has an "innovative new control scheme" (which Microsoft or Sony will pinch if it proves popular).

Or are we in for another 7 years of scraps from the Third Party dinner tables. And by scraps, I mean NO Silent Hill, NO Resident Evil, NO Soul Calibur, NO (decent version of) COD, NO Battlefield, NO Saints Row, NO Metal Gear...

If Nintendo are really serious about coveting the hardcore crew, they need to think ahead.

Infernapeking

#86

Infernapeking said:

An unknown developer why should I even bother it probably a exclusive developer for ps360 or a anti nintendo hater.

WiiULoveSquid

#87

WiiULoveSquid said:

But seriously though, I am going to love the living heck out of my WiiU. Mario's mustache will have never looked so good. Kirby will actually look like a real life pink ball that's alive on the screen. The circle pad pro does not leave my 3DS, I'm prep'd for that controller big time. E3 E3 E3 E3 come softly.

sc100

#88

sc100 said:

As for me, I'll wait for E3 before I pass judgement on the Wii U, which is only two months away. We'll know basically everything then, as we'll only be four or five months away from launch at that point. In the meantime, we have some people saying the Wii U is less powerful than Xbox360/PS3, some saying it's the same and some saying it's more powerful, which basically leaves us still not knowing anything regarding its power.

Popyman

#89

Popyman said:

I really don't care anymore. Nintendo has begun to prove that they know how to do things with the 3DS and if rumors are true about Sony and Microsoft's systems (no used games, always having to be connected to the internet) I'm going to be getting a Wii U by default, screw graphics.

JustAnotherUser

#90

JustAnotherUser said:

I have just received information from an anonymous source that the Wii U is less powerful than the Atari 2600.

WiiULoveSquid

#91

WiiULoveSquid said:

AND when I go down a pipe Mario is pooped out from the TV to the controller! Whoa man I'm excited

Samholy

#92

Samholy said:

huho. sounds bad for nin...wait
this is rumors. this is speculations frpm unknown sources.

here i read in an unknown website,coming from a mysterious developper that the Wii U might not be as powerful, but it will be able to bake things and provide energy drinks on demand, via USB, for half the market price.

Xiao_Pai

#93

Xiao_Pai said:

And watch the Wii U turns out to be an all-power house that'll make the PS4 and XBox 720 look like crap. xD

sdcazares1980

#95

sdcazares1980 said:

I'll wait for the console to come out, but judging by Nintendo's history, I'm a bit concerned that once again it will be treated as a second-class console. Even with all the gimmicks of "innovative" gameplay, if most of the games are not going to be as good as the "Xbox 720" or the "PS4", then all this talk about being "innovative" and "fun" is not going to work.

tweet75

#96

tweet75 said:

imagine 16 years ago if it was announced the N64 was less powerful than the genesis or the playstation was less powerful than the snes.

mamp

#97

mamp said:

The only thing that worries me about this console is that if it is underpowered how innovative can that controller be. I mean it's just a contoller with a touch screen in a way it's a giant overpowered 3DS. Your TV being the top screen and the controller being the bottom part of the 3DS.

MarkyVigoroth

#100

MarkyVigoroth said:

Nintendoo did purposefully restrict the capabilities of the Nintendoo Café (Yes; I am calling Wii U by its prototype name). Some people speculated that this is a move in order for the Café to "catch up" to its competitors later on.

Kid_A

#101

Kid_A said:

This is laughably untrue. These quotes read like dumb teenagers making crap up. "Yeah the graphics just aren't as good. It's the uh...shaders (I think I read that word somewhere). I mean it does SOME stuff (high tech developers say "stuff right?) better, but that's mostly due to its more modern design."
It does some things better but only due to its more modern design? What could that possibly mean? These quotes are so childishly nonspecific that it makes them impossible to take seriously.

Retro_on_theGo

#102

Retro_on_theGo said:

Not true. I don't believe. Rumors about this things horse power are all over the place so I'll just wait till E3 to know.

alphabingo1

#103

alphabingo1 said:

Any person with some basic graphic technical knowledge will know this article is a joke. "There aren't as many shaders" quote gives it away that it is trolling. The programmers have to program their own shaders !! They could make 10 shaders or 1000 shaders, it will only take more time to make more. The capabilities of the machine and how well the shaders are written determine how many can be used simultaneously. But saying the number of shaders available out-of -the box from nintendo or from any 3D engine running on WiiU have something to do with how powerful the console is graphically, is a big BS. It has nothing to do with how powerful the console is graphically ! Its like buying a car but saying its underpowered because on all the roads where you use it, there is a limit of 10 miles per hour.

"There aren't as many shaders" quote only tells us that the people saying this don't know anything about graphics, making games, or even what a shader actually is ! Now if they had said that the shaders are limited in the number of instructions and passes then ok, or even if they said we can't have many shaders simultaneously, that would have worked but this is BS. Just by looking at the tech demos from last year, one can tell there are no such limitations. These are just trolls BSing, don't take that rumour seriously.

Dreadjaws

#105

Dreadjaws said:

@Nintendoftw

Are you the same "Nintendoftw" from IGN? Because you sound like him.

I own both a Wii and a PS3, and I'm so dissapointed by the latter I only use it for Blu Ray movies. The PS3 is just the same as the PS2 with fancier graphics. That's all. The Wii is one of the best consoles in existence. The controls revolutionized gaming, this statement backed up by the fact that Microsoft and Sony decided to incorporate them in their systems.

Also, you have to take into account that the Wii is not just motion controls. Virtual Console is a major part of the Wii, and it's amazing. There is a reason it's the most sold console from the last generation. It really is a great system.

@alphabingo1
I totally agree. Those statements make no sense at all. I think I'm gonna give these extremely reliable sources a pass.

drumsandperc92

#106

drumsandperc92 said:

Nintendo Wii was one generation behind in terms of power. But we know that the Wii is capable of producing graphics that were somewhat better than Xbox, Ps2, and gamecube. It was referred to often as a gamecube 1.5 in terms of power.
I will reiterate. The Wii is considered one generation behind. But, it is more powerful than all of the consoles of the previous generation, even if it is only slightly.
That being said, the Wii U will be on par, if not slightly more powerful (at least) than the current gen.
Nintendo would be, quite frankly, the dumbest company in the world if they were to come out with a next gen console that is not even capable of producing the same power as the current gen of consoles.
It will be at least just as powerful, and like I said, I'll put my money on it being equivalent to an Xbox 360 v 1.5, as opposed to equivalent to the next generation xbox/ps, but also as opposed to being weaker than the 360/ps3. To me, that sounds obsurd, and I refuse to believe Nintendo would sh*t all over their fans and gamers, by releasing a console that is not even current gen, AGAIN! So, two consoles (wii and wii u) coming out 6 years apart, neither of which are on par with 360/ps3? Yeah, right. That makes sense.

Emaan

#108

Emaan said:

Wii isn't a failure, quite the opposite. It has great games and revolutionized gaming as we know it. The Wii U will do the same thing, regardless of its graphical power, which I'm pretty sure is better than the current generation, no need to worry.

MetalGearZelda

#109

MetalGearZelda said:

This rumour states that the wiiU does not have as much shaders than the Ps3/360. Last time I checked the ps3 has less than 100 shaders while the gpu rumoured to be in the wiiU has 400+. Native 1080p is also a big step up from native 540p, seeing the difference between native 480p and 540p was so great. Devs like CryTek, who people thought would never praise nintendo have said that they are very impressed. Mark Rein, who people said would rather spit on nintendo than praise them has expressed his sincere enthusiasm about the wiiU. Now an anonymous source has said that the wiiU is not even as powerful as current gen consoles. The source hasn't even mentioned his company. Who do you rather believe reps from real devs or an anonymous source that could be a random person at starbucks posting BS rumours about the WiiU.

kevinkool123

#111

kevinkool123 said:

I'm tired of people that say that videogames without cool graphics suck,so if in the future we get a Barbie videogame with lots of graphics it will be awesome

AVahne

#112

AVahne said:

This just in:
Every Wii U will come with a free miniature Zero Suit Samus robot that will make you sandwiches while you game.

MasterGraveheart

#113

MasterGraveheart said:

Why would Nintendo make a console that can't compare power-wise with either of their rivals, especially when they're just about to jump themselves? When the Wii came out, it was comparable in graphical power to the PS2 and original X-Box. I don't buy this at all.

Shining-Void

#114

Shining-Void said:

I doubt this rumor is true, Nintendo isn't stupid enough to release a second console weaker than the 360/PS3.(I hope)

Nightsider

#116

Nightsider said:

Well if i just get it for smash bros. i might as well get the other games while im at it. The only reason i actually wanted the wii u was for the extra content you get when you connect the 3ds and wii u smash bros

C-Olimar

#117

C-Olimar said:

@MasterGraveheart Have you played a PS2 game lately? I have, and the graphics are certainly not as good as the Wii. Think about it - the Gamecube had the best graphics of the sixth generation, so if the Wii was at PS2/Xbox levels it would have worse graphics than the Gamecube!

SteveW

#118

SteveW said:

@kevinkool123 - if Barbie looks good then count me in! who cares about games being fun?

Everyone complaining about graphics should realize one thing... in 10 years the best graphics we have now will suck, PS3 and Xbox 360 games will look bad, that's the way it will always be.

What game from 20 years ago would you rather play now? a fun one or a Genesis or SNES game with killer graphics? graphics do not hold up over time, gameplay does.

thiagoauler

#119

thiagoauler said:

I think it's pretty funny watching people argue about what it's better...
It's not "power" that matters... but QUALITY really does!
Sony was successful back in the years with PS1 and PS2... but anything other than that was a total fiasco.
Even Microsoft is doing a great job!
Nintendo gave us great hardwares and softwares for almost 40 years. So please, don't say bull.

Sir_Deadly

#120

Sir_Deadly said:

@James I dont appreciate the Nintendo bashing the Nintendoftw is doing. Thats all I am saying about that. Crap like this makes me not come on this site anymore because i believe if all of us are nintendo fans, we WOULD NOT be talking like this about the new console.

Nintendoftw

#122

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I was talking about a real Dead Space game. All of the CODs on the wii fail compared to other counterparts. And you give the Wii too much credit in comparison to the gamecube... You do know the Wii is only something like 1.5x more powerful right? I mean I can't stress power enough... Why weren't the best games of this gen (ie red dead redemption, Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, or even Grand Theft Auto IV/ upcoming V) on the Wii? Tell me, I mean power doesn't matter right?

Nintendoftw

#123

Nintendoftw said:

@Assassin87 I am talking about the Wii... And it's not Nintendo bashing it's Wii bashing. Any real Nintendo fan would know that Nintendo made a HUGE change when they made the Wii, and it's for the worse. If Nintendo models the Wii U tactic after the success of the Wii then Nintendo, in terms of consoles, will have lost complete respect among the real gaming community. NO games don't have to be violent to be fun, look at mario. But games do have to be up to date... And the fact that the Wii is less powerful than a last gen system should be an outrage among Nintendo fans.

Sam_Loser2

#125

Sam_Loser2 said:

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Wii U isn't as powerful as the 360 or ps3, but the software is where the real power lies. The Wii U still has a unique controller and less power would mean lower price. That's really what won people over with the Wii.

TrueWiiMaster

#126

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Obviously Red Dead Redemption, Skyrim, and GTA 4 weren't on the Wii because it lacked the raw power to play them. HOWEVER! Calling those "the best games of this gen" is assuming too much. Yes those games needed more power than the Wii has to run, but did that make them better than games that CAN run on the Wii? Absolutely not. I'm certainly not saying they're bad games. They're definitely some of the best of this generation. But so are Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, Monster Hunter Tri, Skyward Sword, and various other games that are exclusive to the Wii. The power of the HD systems is needed to play power-hungry games, but that is in no way relevant to a game's quality. Come to think of it, many call Skyward Sword one of the best games EVER! Let me ask you a question. If power is so all important, why has the Wii had so many great games? In case you'd like to respond with "it hasn't", here's a short list: Mario Galaxy 1+2, Punch Out!, Monster Hunter Tri, Skyward Sword, Xenoblade, The Last Story, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Red Steel 2. And that's a SHORT list. It could be much longer. I'll say again, the Wii is in no way a failure.

BTW, I don't follow Dead Space, but my understanding is that though the entry on the Wii was a spin-off, it was still a very good entry in the series. If anything, the fact that a good Dead Space can be made for the Wii further proves my point that power isn't everything.

SteveW

#127

SteveW said:

I love the Nintendo Wii, I own every Nintendo console (and a few others) and the Wii has an amazing library of games, where else can we have such a wide variety of games? and not just the games made by Nintendo...Endless Ocean? nothing else out there like it. Tiger Woods with motion plus? no other beats it, I'll take the perfect controls over HD anyday.

So jump ship already Nintendoftw... I for one am looking forward to the new Nintendo revolution all over again :)

SteveW

#128

SteveW said:

I love the Nintendo Wii, I own every Nintendo console (and a few others) and the Wii has an amazing library of games, where else can we have such a wide variety of games? and not just the games made by Nintendo...Endless Ocean? nothing else out there like it. Tiger Woods with motion plus? no other beats it, I'll take the perfect controls over HD anyday.

So jump ship already Nintendoftw... I for one am looking forward to the new Nintendo revolution all over again :)

TrueWiiMaster

#129

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
This is to your last comment, #124. I didn't see it before.

There you go again, saying "real" Nintendo fans should call the Wii a failure because it wasn't technologically on par with the competition. That's not real Nintendo fans. That's you. Real Nintendo fans would pick up the the Wii remote and play some Nintendo games. Real Nintendo fans would play New Super Mario and Donkey Kong Country Returns and reminisce about the SNES (if they're old enough to do so...). They would marvel at the colorful and varied levels of Mario Galaxy. They would knock out King Hippo for the umpteenth time and they would explore every corner of Hyrule. And most of all, they would enjoy Nintendo games.

(This would apply to any true gamer as well. The "real gaming community" that you're referring to is the one that recently arose atop online fps games. In other words, casual gamers. Any true gamer, even if they didn't play Nintendo's games, should respect quality software.)

Ummm, the Gamecube was the most powerful last gen... Or if it wasn't, it was very, VERY close. And the Wii is stronger than the Gamecube... I think you should check your math.

Sean_Aaron

#130

Sean_Aaron said:

I want two things from the Wii-U: backwards-compatibility with the Wii (software and hardware) and new software/gaming experiences. I have no doubt that Nintendo will deliver on both of my desires.

Wolfenstein83

#134

Wolfenstein83 said:

My conspiracy theory is not very original, but I think those devs were paid to say those things.
Also, all I care about are the games...why don't the devs worry less about how powerful it is, and make some freakin' games instead?
I am pretty confident it will be powerful enough to produce some very nice graphics, even though it will not be on par with consoles (if they still exist by then) from the year 2038....seriously, I don't care.
I just want a release date, a price, and a list of launch games...thank you!
BTW I am an anonymous game developer, so you better listen to what I say, and take it to heart.
LMAO!
Yeah right...

hillbill26

#135

hillbill26 said:

The only reason they're saying that is because of the graphics. THE FREAKING GRAPHICS! IS THAT ALL U CAN FREAKING FOCUS ON! U SOUND LIKE MY NO-LIFE FRIENDS! "Oh, the graphic this, the graphics that" JUST SHUT THE HECK UP! ENJOY THE GAME FOR ONCE! Jeez! You didn't hear people complaining about the "graphics" when "Pong" came out waaaaay back when. Y r u complaining now? Quit the whining.

Drewroxsox

#136

Drewroxsox said:

I hate graphic whores... All they care about is how good a game looks rather than the experience. The anonymous developers are either
A. Microsoft/Sony ( who have never touched a developers Kit ) Or
B. Someone who hates on Nintendo
If the anonymous developers were so respected, then they wouldn't have been anonymous in the first place. Other developers are very pleased with the WiiU though, so who should I believe? Two dumb a$$3s or people who have worked with the tech? Nintendo is always unique, which is why no one will ever rain on their parade.

EvisceratorX

#137

EvisceratorX said:

Well obviously this is just three gamecubes taped together. What I'd like to know is how many bits this thing is!

SomeBitTripFan

#138

SomeBitTripFan said:

I figured out what they mean! In Sony and Microsoft are building new consoles. Because they have no originality for names or ideas their new consoles will be:
Sony: Xbox 360
Microsoft: PS3
They will release in late 20XX.
You heard it here first!

fortius54

#139

fortius54 said:

A lot of systems have come and gone over the last 25 years. Many of those systems were more powerful then the Nintendo system at the time. Despite all of that Nintendo has been the constant. You have to deliver the content players want. That has been the major difference. People will literally by there system to play the first party games. That can't be said for the other major players.

IMO, PS3 and XBOX compete with one another. Nintendo is family oriented. That is what they do best. The other two...they just do not have what it takes to make those family games.

VincentV

#140

VincentV said:

@Nintendoftw @TrueWiiMaster The Wii was not a bad console. While it surely should have been a little better in the processing & online departments, it was not bad. If the 1st party support was the only good games on it, I'm ashamed of you for not noticing stuff like Sonic Colors. Yeah, some games were limited by the Wii. Anyways, to get things started: Will the Wii U be that bad? Who are these anonymous devs? Or are they devs? Maybe that's why they're anonymous. Derp, they're fanboys, the big N's competitors, or biased devs. Listen to Epic Games. I can trust them. Plus these prototypes can be underclocked and all sorts of things that can limit all sorts of crap. Second, was Halo 2 crap? Combat Evolved's remake got positive scores. Sure it may have been outdated, but it still holds up well. It still plays well. It still has varying level designs, etc. It doesn't make it crap. Third, just an FYI, there is no official clockrate for the Wii. It's rumored it is around 730 MHz, and the Xbox is confirmed to have a clockrate of about 730 MHz. Jeez, do your research. The GCN used a 480 MHz CPU. OK. That's over. Still, you can freely voice your opinion. Just be sure not to blindly deny things, etc. Stop arguing. Games/gameplay make the system/games; graphics do not make games good, because Battlefield 3 would win hands down, and while it's good, that is certainly not the case. Also, I've heard of the Conduit, and that does not sound 100% original. Halo is more original.

Kage_88

#141

Kage_88 said:

"Trying to catch up with Sony and Microsoft is irrelevant beyond belief at this point. Nintendo's road diverged a long time ago, and now it seems wiser to simply carry on ahead."

This is a quote from John Dean of CVG - and one I kinda agree with. Yes, Nintendo desire the support from 3rd parties, strong online and media support (such as Netflix).

At the end of the day though, it's clear that Nintendo follow a different creative and ideological philosophy than Sony, Microsoft or Apple.

Even then, I still doubt that Wii U is 'weaker' than PS3 and Xbox 360, as there have been so many developer claims to the contrary. Can't wait for E3.

NINTENBOY

#142

NINTENBOY said:

Wow why is it when it comes to everything Nintendo there's always a bunch of radicaly different opinons like there's NEVER a stright or general answer to anything Nintendo does unless you actually hands on with it yourself.

You know what else is shady about this is how all these so called developers are anonymous all of a sudden, developers never had problems speaking out about Nintendo before so why now?

Gamesake

#144

Gamesake said:

The Wii U has some mighty big Pegasus Shoes to fill. The Wii has been Nintendo's greatest console ever.

Nintendoftw

#145

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster YES that does make them better..> It's because they have more to offer and more content to enjoy, along with online play to keep the game alive. Sure all of those other games are fun, but when you actually play a true current gen game you would know it's like comparing a PS2 game to a PS3 GAME

Nintendoftw

#146

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Playing Nintendo brand games doesn't make you a fan... Calling anything with a Nintendo label slapped great only makes you a fool who is easily scammed.

Nintendoftw

#147

Nintendoftw said:

@VincentV Wrong... The wii's processor is 729 mhz while the xbox's was 733... And plus the Xbox was overall more powerful and way better with shaders.

Nintendoftw

#148

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Quality software isn't made for game systems that were made in 2006 and use hardware that was cutting age back in 2001... The real gaming community has nothing to do with online fps games --. And plus I notice most of the people here always bash online fps games. Have you even played one? No even more so, do you even own one? --

komicturtle

#149

komicturtle said:

Ridiculous. In the words of Judge Judy, "If it doesn't make sense then its not true."

Contradictions and inconsistencies abound. Funny how devs who came forward about WiiU being more powerful than the current gen have been named but the ones that say otherwise choose not to...? Either they are stuck on older dev kits or this report is complete fabrication.

Nintendoftw

#150

Nintendoftw said:

I'd have no problem if the Wii was the least powerful of this gen but still could keep up with competition and still could handle ports of games, but no rofl. The Wii is to weak the handle even the weakest games on the PS3/360...

Aviator

#151

Aviator said:

I love how because s/he is anonymous s/he is titled a fanboy/biased towards Sony/Microsoft.

Kudos to those in these comments who have supported their opinions, rather than simply pulling the 'It's a troll' card.

Also, I honestly can't believe that a gamer cannot enjoy a game solely based on its gameplay. It's about the experience. Sound, graphics, story, gameplay all work together to create the game. They don't stand separate from one another. If one is superior to others, then the game will suffer as a whole.

SanFrisco9er

#152

SanFrisco9er said:

XBOX:OG>wii>Gamecube>N64>SNES>NES>VirtualBoy
Graphics wise&IDK
The question here is: Is the Wii U going to have better graphics than XBOX:OG or is it going to fail like the others?(dont take it seriously)
I love my XBOX(MY first system) btw if only it had lasted as long as ps2. & For people saying gamecube having better graphics than XBOX:OG go play Halo or JSRF and then ask yourself I've should've done my research.
& i never knew until now(via.nintendoftw)the XBOX:OG had better graphics than the wii.♪TO LEGIT TO QUIT♪.
(typed this on my 49erRed 3DS)

Mandoble

#155

Mandoble said:

What these anonymous devs post doesnt matter at all. Just before or just after WiiU realease how it compares with 360/PS3 will be public and everybody will be able to take this into consideration (or not) as a factor to buy it or not.

SomeBitTripFan

#156

SomeBitTripFan said:

@SanFrisco9er

Have you played Metroid Prime? In 2002 it came out, in 2012 it looks outstanding and not even out of date. Halo can't compare. (if you think I'm trying to start a Halo vs Metroid battle you're wrong) Just stating the facts.

TrueWiiMaster

#157

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Ummm, no it doesn't? I'm not sure how to respond to someone blatantly saying their favorite games are just plain better than mine because the have better graphics... I disagree with you 100%, but I can't change what games you like best. Like you said, the games I mentioned for the Wii are fun. Isn't that the most important part of a game? And BTW, I prefer PS2 games to PS3 games. They had more variety, more creativity, and were just plain more fun (at least for me).

I don't think everything Nintendo ever made was great (looking at you Wii Music), but the definition of a Nintendo fan would be one who likes Nintendo and the products they make. You're telling me that if I was a "real" Nintendo fan I would shun the Wii purely for its lack of power, rather than base my opinion on the games it has. That's far more flawed than saying Nintendo fans like Nintendo games.

Any truly real gamer wouldn't hate the Wii for its graphics. They would love it or hate it for its games, hence the name GAMER, one who plays games. The reason I brought up the online fps fanbase is to describe the group who would lose all respect for Nintendo for not producing the most technologically advanced console on the market. In other words, a group well-known to be leaning towards 360 and PS3 would say they don't like Nintendo... Shocker... Like I said, a REAL gamer would play the games, not just complain about tech. And no, I don't own any online fps's. It's just not worth it to me (what with online games having expiration dates). But I've played plenty of Halo, COD, and Unreal Tournament online with my brother. I've played more than enough to know what the communities are like, and how casual these games really are. Have you ever played an online fps?

Huh. If that's true about the Xbox being slightly more powerful than the Wii it brings up an interesting question... Why do most Wii games look better than almost every Xbox game? Is it because quality development matters more than power?

TrueWiiMaster

#158

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
In response to comment #154.

The Wii may not have the biggest games from the HD systems, but don't forget that they don't have the biggest games on the Wii either.

TrueWiiMaster

#159

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
I've played Halo 1 and 2 and both have pretty ugly graphics. The textures look blurry and the characters, when they aren't masked, are some of the ugliest of the generation. Now, I'm not comparing Halo to modern games when I say this. I'm comparing it to the Gamecube. It's strange that the Xbox was the most powerful system last gen and yet didn't have the best graphics. If you don't believe me, try playing Metroid Prime 1 or 2 or Starfox Dinosaur Planet. And don't forget, often called the best looking game of last gen, Resident Evil 4 looked best on the Gamecube.

Gamesake

#160

Gamesake said:

@TrueWiiMaster One thing GameCubers never seem to grasp (or can't determine from a screen shot) is how massive the levels are in Halo. Metroid Prime has tiny rooms and corridors separated by doors you have to blast and wait in front of while the next little area loads. In fact if you rush from room to room too fast in Metroid Prime the game will freeze--which sadly happened to me more than once.

TrueWiiMaster

#161

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Gamesake
I don't know what to say. I was just playing Metroid Prime and, though some areas are small, some are pretty huge. I never had the freezing problem you mentioned, nor have I ever even heard of it. Also, despite my love of the Gamecube, I have played both Xbox original Halos. The levels are far from being big enough to excuse the poor graphics, and many textures and environments are reused over and over again, not to mention the downright awful faces on every unmasked human character. Metroid Prime, on the other hand, has extremely varied areas, from volcanoes to frozen tundras to jungle-esque valleys. Each looks entirely different and sports unique enemies.

Besides, even if everything you said was completely true and Metroid Prime didn't have the above-mentioned characteristics, it wouldn't change the fact that it looks significantly better than Halo.

SanFrisco9er

#163

SanFrisco9er said:

Should've known HALO will and always have their fair share of haters.
@SomeBitTripFan No i haven't played Metroid Prime(& i never will) because i was to busy playing DOOM3, Ninja Gaiden 1&2, Farcry Instincts 1&2, Burnout 3, The chronicles of Riddick, Conker live & reloaded(dont start with ''the original was waayyyy better'' cuz it wasn't), The Prince of Persia(XBOX version in my opinion is the best),GTA S.A & V.C, The Warriors,etc, etc, etc, etc. Did i mention Mortal Kombat Armegeddon? I played hunters those that count?
@TrueWiiMaster If thats true its because XBOX:OG has been dead for like 4 years and i believe its a last/past gen console. Its sad that you are actually comparing these two when the one you need to compare it to is the XBOXkinect360(XBOX:OG's papi).
@Assassin87 Sorry I'm not a technician.

TrueWiiMaster

#164

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
What? I was comparing the original Xbox to the Gamecube. Why is that wrong? Both Gamecube Metroid Primes look better than Halo. And I'm not a hater. I enjoyed Halo 2, Halo 3, and ODST, especially Halo 2.

BTW, you're really missing out if you never play Metroid Prime. It really is one of the best sci-fi fps's ever created.

Gamesake

#165

Gamesake said:

@TrueWiiMaster If you enjoyed Halo 2, you should play the original Halo: Combat Evolved. It's way better--not graphically, but it is better.

@SanFrisco9er If you ever decide to play Metroid Prime 1 and 2, splurge on the Metroid Prime Trilogy so you don't have to put up with the horrid GameCube control scheme. The Wiimote and Nunchuk were a Godsend to that series. The GameCube version wouldn't allow you to move and aim at the same time!

Nintendoftw

#166

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster What are you talking about...? Just get a PS3/360... You have absolutely no idea and no experience in anything you are saying.... Just because a game has better graphics means NOTHING. I like the games because they are engaging, fun, and etc. All the games you stated ONLY have good gameplay..IN order for a game to be excellent it must be good all around. Gameplay, sound, graphics, story, and all. ALL of it matters, this isn't 1983.

Nintendoftw

#167

Nintendoftw said:

@Gamesake I actually have a gamecube and xbox.... Saying the gamecube has better graphics is like saying the xbox 360 has better graphics than a PC... Later xbox games are comparable to the average xbox 360 game -_-

Nintendoftw

#168

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Calling games like Halo and Unreal Tournament (Wth?) casual just shows that you don't know anything about real current gen gaming. PLAYING a game is nothing like HAVING the game. I played saints row 2 and thought it was amazing. Then I bought it and it actually is garbage.

SanFrisco9er

#169

SanFrisco9er said:

@TrueWiiMaster First of all I never said it was wrong I said it is sad & am talking about the last paragraph of comment #162 & I have Metroid Prime Hunters for the ds so am basically not missing out & opinions are not facts last time I checked.Is there any other games other than the Prime series & RE 4 that can actually be compared with HALO 1's graphics even though it was released like 2yrs before prime, 4yrs before RE 4 and over a decade ago.Mech Assault 2 wasn't very popular but I'am certain it has better graphics than all the games on the Gamecube and it also had some cool online play(example of a legit opinion).If you post something else that says GC has better graphics than XBOX:OG than you're blindly in love with the GC.It's like saying the DS has better graphics than the psp when it obviously didn't and you're saying as a proud ds owner(for example) '' have you played phantom hourglass(my favorite), spirit tracks, MP Hunters, PKMN, etc.''Which current portable do you think has better graphics?I'll say vita even though am a proud 3DS owner, I know you'll say vita aswell.& dont hate(looking @ comment #164).
@Gamesake I'll skip on that just because i don't have a wii. I would love to see a 3ds Metroid FPS tho or even a side scroller like Fusion & Zero mission.The XBOX for me is like the NES is to retro/classic gamers.

Nintendoftw

#170

Nintendoftw said:

And PS2 beating the PS3? I love my PS2 but you have no idea what you're talking about. Especially saying the ps3 has no variety.

SomeBitTripFan

#172

SomeBitTripFan said:

Halo released 11/15/01
Metroid Prime (which is VERY different from hunters) released 11/17/02
A 1 year,2 day difference

NINTENBOY

#173

NINTENBOY said:

Here's a youtube comment I found by Kenshin0011 that I think saids it the best:

"FACT: This next console (WiiU) WILL output in full 1080p graphics (PS3 and 360 only run in 720p)
FACT: The console has PS3/360 ports that developers themselves say run just fine on it (so then the idea of Wii U being less powerful is out the window automatically).
FACT: The console will be backwards compatible with Wii.
FACT: The controller has dual analog, triggers, four buttons, and is comfortable and light according to most reports. The touchscreen just adds more to it. It doesn't take away from the normal control scheme."

So fellow Wii gamers don't even swat this negative feedback because it's obviously BS it's just here to give the the WiiU haters some little bit hope that WiiU will fail, it's just so pathitic!!

TrueWiiMaster

#174

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I'm not gonna buy either system anytime soon. Not only do I still have plenty to play on my Wii, especially with Xenoblade coming out this Friday, but any money I would think to spend on them would be saved for the Wii U. Besides that, neither system offers anywhere near enough games I want to justify dropping hundreds of dollars on the console. As far as my lack of ownership affecting my play experience, I don't follow. I've played games on both system, but those experiences should be disqualified from reference because they weren't from my own copy of the games? Does that also apply to renters? How about people who bought games only to sell them later? Are their experiences also null? I got the same multiplayer experience from Halo as any owner, just for less time.

Skyward Sword excels at every category you mentioned. Not that your categories are even applicable to games. Saying a game needs great graphics, sound, story, and gameplay to be excellent automatically removes every retro, puzzle, racing, and fighting game, and almost every platformer, from the running. What does that leave? Only shooters (when they actually have a great story), RPG's and adventure games can be called excellent? Not to mention where old games fit in...

The Gamecube had many games that looked better than many Xbox games. It wasn't a rare occurrence. The gap between the 360 and PC's is FAR greater than the gap between the Xbox and Gamecube. But don't worry. The Xbox wasn't TOO far behind the 'cube.

Oh yeah. I like the games I mentioned because they also "are engaging, fun, and etc."

P.S.- When did real gaming change to become "real current gen gaming"? And if the real gaming of today isn't the real gaming of the past, how can we be sure which really is real gaming?

TrueWiiMaster

#175

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Metroid Prime Hunters is not the same as a full-fledged Metroid Prime console game. If you like sci-fi fps's like Halo, you really should at least try a Metroid Prime.

You're right that opinions aren't facts. What was that referring to?

First of all, Halo 1 AND 2 were both outdone by Metroid Prime 1 and 2's graphics. Not just Halo 1. Other games on the Gamecube that looked better than Halo? Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, Resident Evil Zero, Starfox Adventures on Dinosaur Planet, Star Wars Rogue Squadron: Rogue Leader 2, Legend of Zelda Windwaker and Twilight Princess, and F-Zero GX. Some of those would be hard to compare to Halo due to the difference in styles, but I'd say they're all more than comparable to either Halo, in addition to RE4 and Metroid Prime 1 and 2. In my opinion (OPINION, not fact) Pikmin 1 and 2 were comparable to Halo as well.

Why does saying the Gamecube has games that look better than Xbox games make me "blindly in love with the GC", while you saying Xbox games look better than Gamecube games doesn't make you "blindly in love with the Xbox"?

Oh, and yes, the Vita has better graphics. I don't think it's the better system, but it does have more horsepower. How you can seriously make a comparison between DS vs PSP and Gamecube vs Xbox would be a better question. Even if you don't think the Gamecube had games on the same level as the Xbox, you can't deny that they shared more than a few multiplatform games. There was never a huge discrepancy between versions. The DS could never handle a port from a full-sized PSP game, just based on the tech difference.

And what on earth does my age have to do with anything?!

TrueWiiMaster

#176

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
In response to #175, which I missed the first time.

I said I prefer PS2 games over PS3 games, not that the PS2 itself was technologically better than the PS3. I'm not a huge fan of shooters (I play them in multiplayer, but rarely on my own simply because of my preferences) and most PS3 games rely heavily on shooting. Killzone, Resistance, COD, Battlefield, and even Uncharted are all shooters (though I understand Uncharted is more than a shooter). The games that aren't shooters often have counterparts, often better counterparts, on the PS2. Few would argue that the PS3 has been better for RPG's than the PS2, and there's absolutely no question which was better for platformers (it wasn't the PS3). My brother, again, a big Sony fan (used to be an Xbox fan too, but that's another story) claims the Metal Gears on the PS2 were better than MGS4. Street Fighter 4 is awesome, but the PS2 had Soul Caliber 2 and 3 Tekkens. If you know of some PS3 games I haven't heard of that lend to the console's overall variety, please share!

Nintendoftw

#177

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster STOP bringing up games of the past. ITS THE YEAR 2012. NOT 1983. Story matters. Graphics matter (It always has mattered rofl, what do you think the bit wars were). Gameplay matters. If a game have every bad but gameplay then it would be considered terrible. The way the game plays is the most important, but without the icing which is graphics, sound, story, etc... THE GAME WILL SUCK. Did Pong have good gameplay? Yes. Good sound? Nope. Good graphics by today's standards? Nope. Good story? Nope. Just good gameplay. Compare Pong to a game that sucks by today's standards... Duke Nukem. Pong was good back in 1978... Duke Nukem sucks in the year 2012. Which would you rather play...?

Nintendoftw

#178

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And Metroid Prime 2's graphics fail compared to Halo 2... I remember renting both of them back in the days and I enjoyed Halo 2 a lot more than Metroid Prime 2. Only real reason really is because I was like 8 or 9 and MP2 was too complex. Metroid Prime series is great but I have all 3 last gen systems and graphically the Xbox annihilated the competition. Look at Just Cause, Chronicles Of Riddick, etc... Gamecube and PS2 didn't stand a chance against the xbox's graphics

Nintendoftw

#179

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Little Big Planet, Red Dead, LA Noir, Heavy Rain, BF3, MW3, huge variety of downloadable titles (This by itself destroys PS2 in terms of variety), Dead Space, Batman arkham city, etc. GET a PS3 and then you can judge it invariety of games. PS2 had variety, sure, but I have BOTH and can say that the PS3 overall is better and has a hell of a lot more variety. And plus online shooters are amazing, especially BF3, you should actually TRY one before saying they are all generic. I have BF3 and have played MW3 and they are completely different games.

Nintendoftw

#180

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Little Big Planet, Red Dead, LA Noir, Heavy Rain, BF3, MW3, huge variety of downloadable titles (This by itself destroys PS2 in terms of variety), Dead Space, Batman arkham city, etc. GET a PS3 and then you can judge it invariety of games. PS2 had variety, sure, but I have BOTH and can say that the PS2 overall is better and has a hell of a lot more variety. And plus online shooters are amazing, especially BF3, you should actually TRY one before saying they are all generic. I have BF3 and have played MW3 and they are completely different games.

TrueWiiMaster

#181

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Okay, then I'll stick to modern gen games, despite you referencing several old games while telling me not to.

First of all, did you read my post? What about all of the genres that are excluded from excellence based on your standards? Can a puzzle game never be excellent? Is Gran Turismo 5, one of the best looking games of this generation, less awesome because it lacks a story? You're categories for excellence are seriously flawed.

Secondly, by your logic, every game that came out in the first couple years of this generation is now bad, or at least worse than it was. Why? Because the graphics have aged. Modern Warfare was a great game, but does it have "Good graphics by today's standards"? Not really. If it were released right now people would call it garbage because it looks so much worse than Modern Warfare 3. Likewise, Modern Warfare 3 will be outdone in a year or two. Does that mean that it should suddenly lose 2 points off its scores?

Though I said I wouldn't mention old games anymore, just humble me for second. Try comparing a game that was more than just two paddles and a ball to modern gen games. How about Super Mario Bros? How does it compare to this gen's games? It had great music and great gameplay but lacked a deep story and doesn't have HD graphics. I'd say it still compares favorably. What do you think?

Nintendoftw

#182

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster You're purposefully trying to misinterpret the reply for the sake of the argument. Puzzle games obviously don't NEED stories, racing games obviously don't NEED stories. And are you seriously considering that the early games of this generation are now considered old...? Wth..? OLD is last gen, NOT current gen.

Nintendoftw

#183

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster YEs super mario bros has all of those things, and was great for it's time. But to be honest, it sucks horribly compared to super mario galaxy... It's an awesome classic but it just isn't even comparable to what we have now.

Nintendoftw

#184

Nintendoftw said:

Now expanding on that note we all know that the average current gen game is better than the average last gen game. Now Nintendo comes along with a system that uses last gen technology and produces games of last gen quality. That means that the average Wii game is worse than the average PS3/360 game. Be honest here, would you rather have Grand Theft Auto III or Grand Theft Auto IV?

TrueWiiMaster

#186

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You're telling me that at age 8 or 9 you were playing M games? Wow. Anyway, you're saying that at that young age you were already capable of saying which games had the best graphics? You don't think your bias towards which games you liked (Halo) could influence them looking better than the games you didn't like (Metroid)? The Xbox didn't annihilate anyone.

And didn't you just tell me that unless one actually owns a game they can't truly experience it? And yet you rented Metroid?

When did I say all online shooters are generic? Like I said, I've played every Modern Warfare. I would've played Battlefield, but the developers chose to block local play.

Surely you're not telling me that the downloadable games (not talking about retail games here) are on par with full releases on the PS2? If the PS3 has such great variety, please point me to platformers other than Little Big Planet. Platformers as good as Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, and Psychonauts. Please point me towards RPG's as good as Kingdom Hearts, Xenosaga, Final Fantasy X, and Dragon Quest 8.

Except for LBP, Batman, and the downloadable games, and maybe Heavy Rain (I'm not really sure what genre it fits into) those were all shooters. I'm not saying they're not unique from one another, but they're all still in the same genre. When I was talking about variety, I was talking about having every genre well-covered, not having an excellent variety of one genre.

I don't need a PS3 to know what games it has, and that's all I need to know to discuss its variety.

Nintendoftw

#187

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Well lol I didn't only rent Metroid... I have Metroid Prime 3 Corruption. It's fun but, even still I like Halo 2 better because of less complexity and the fact that it never gets boring because of the constant action. I also have Metroid Prime Hunters, and you said that's not a real prime game? You obviously don't have it.

Nintendoftw

#188

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster THose weren't all shooters -_-. LA Noir isn't a shooter. Red Dead isn't a shooter, it's a sandbox game. And yes, a lot of PSn's downloadables are ps2 quality. This is why you should actually HAVE the system to be able to debate it.

TrueWiiMaster

#189

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I don't consider current gen games old. I was just applying your logic. If, in order to be excellent, a game must have up-to-date graphics, a game considered excellent at the beginning of this gen is no longer excellent, because its graphics are no longer up-to-date. Likewise, I didn't misinterpret anything, at least not on purpose. You said in order to be excellent a game needs excellent graphics, sound, gameplay, and story. I'm just saying that's only applicable to specific genres, not games in general. It's also relative. If Uncharted is excellent because it excels in every category, doesn't that mean COD and Battlefield aren't excellent because their stories aren't as good as Uncharted's?

"We all" don't know that. You do, but you've yet to convince me. Also, quality doesn't rely on HD graphics, and Nintendo has sound, gameplay, and story (where applicable) down. Personally, I don't want either GTA. I want a new Donkey Kong, Mario, or Zelda, each offering as much or more quality than anything ever produced in the gaming industry.

P.S.- If last gen games aren't as good as current gen games, and it's not just about graphics, but actually BEING developed with more power, then why are so many PS2 games being ported to the PS3 with HD graphics? It seems people still consider them great games, despite being made for an outdated system.

Nintendoftw

#190

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Oh and having a lot of the same genre means no variety... So you saying not to point out platforming games because PS2 has many more means the PS2 has no variety. That's the logic that you use right? Since the PS3 has so many FPS games?

Nintendoftw

#191

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Graphics don't necessarily have to be the best, they only have to keep up, and the beginning of this gen and what we have now... Well there isn't a huge difference.. It's still the same gen. And donkey kong has nothing to do with the conversation -_-. Okay I will say it another way: Would you rather have Donkey Kong on the SNES or Donkey Kong on the Wii U?

Nintendoftw

#192

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And last gen games don't lose their quality. they are just in a different level all together. Current gen gaming will also be on a different level when the next gen systems come out.

TrueWiiMaster

#193

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Umm, I said Metroid Prime Hunters is NOT comparable to a full-fledged console Metroid Prime (I think you misinterpreted). And liking Halo better due to difference in complexity isn't really objective... Many liked it FOR its complexity.

LA Noir and Red Dead both have a lot of shooting. I don't know too much about either one, and clearly they're not just typical shooters, but I'd still call them shooters nonetheless, in the same way that I'd call GTA and Uncharted shooters. There's more on offer than just shooting, but it's a major part of the game. The way I look at it, if you frequently use guns in a game, it can be classified at least somewhat as a shooter.

I don't have to own a PS3 to see what it has on PSN. I can look on my brother's. Though there are some full games there, few are really as great as great PS2 games, and many fail to even compare to a full retail game.

Nintendoftw

#194

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster LA Noir doesn't have a lot of shooting... What are you talking about...? It's a detective game. Red Dead is a sandbox game similar to GTA IV, and they aren't just shooters. Just because a game has shooting in it doesn't make it specifically in with the shooter genre.

TrueWiiMaster

#196

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
What? I was saying the PS2 had many great platformers while the PS3 has very few. Platformers are far from the majority of games on the PS2, unlike shooters on the PS3. The PS2 represents just about every genre well, while the PS3 seems to ignore a few and focus on a couple. You're response would only work if the PS2 didn't also have tons of RPG's, shooters, racers, fighters, etc.

Asking between Donkey Kong Wii U and Donkey Kong SNES seems a little unfair. Not because the tech makes the new one better, but because I've played the SNES versions several times, and would love a new game. Similarly, I'm leaning towards preferring DKCR on Wii to the SNES entries, not because of graphics or anything that stemmed from technology, but from the higher difficulty it offers with the same excellent formula. I love it because it was made well, not because it has better graphics.

Nintendoftw

#197

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster ANd then you say the majority of games on the PS3 are shooters...? Get out. You can't have an opinion on the argument unless you actually own both systems. Playing and owning are two different things. As I said before, i played Saints Row 2, loved it. Bought it, hated it,.

Nintendoftw

#198

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Anyone from 1990s would love to have a PS3 over an SNES... There's a reason for that. BEcause of hardware. Hardware makes better games. Games like God Of War and Dante's Inferno are good NOT only because of the formula and gameplay, because of all the power it takes to run it. PS2 couldn't handle to the amount of monsters on screen that the PS3 could with God Of War 3. Same with Nintendo systems... Except Nintendo made a stupid move by making the Wii which uses the same processor as the gamecube.

TrueWiiMaster

#199

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I know they're not just shooters, that's why I said "they're not just typical shooters". If I was wrong about LA Noir having a lot of shooting in it, I apologize. The video I watched had shooting in it. And before you say mistakes like that wouldn't happen if I had a PS3, stop. I wouldn't buy GTA, Red Dead, or LA Noire even if I owned one (though LA Noir could be a possibility if its focus is on investigation).

Also, like I said, "The way I look at it, if you frequently use guns in a game, it can be classified at least somewhat as a shooter." It might not be just a shooter, but it's still somewhat a shooter.

And about my being unable to comment on the PS3 because I don't own one, could I use my brother's opinions then? He's owned a PS3 since 2010, and we've both owned Wii's since 2006. He agrees with everything I've said.

Nintendoftw

#201

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Rofl. You can't speak for someone who can't be here to back it up. I have all of the Wii's top games, thing is I stopped buying Wii games after I got a PS3. I have had super smash bros, twilight princess, mp3, Bully, etc. I loved all of them, but the problem is all the 3rd party games SUCK compared to what i have on my PS3. Games like XenoBlade are good... By last gen standards. I have all 3 last gen consoles an I can say I enjoy playing my Xbox/Gamecube over my Wii.

Nintendoftw

#203

Nintendoftw said:

And plus not only is the Wii a level below the competition because of the horrible hardware, the games overall suck compared to last gen consoles too. The PS2 even kills the Wii.

TrueWiiMaster

#204

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I can look up the PS3's library and tell you based solely on that what genres most of the PS3's games are. Ownership has no relevance on what games are available on the console. And btw, I can have any opinion I want, whether you believe it to be justified or not. Just like how you can say that games made for the PS3 are better than games made for the Wii. Totally unjustified, but still your opinion.

Man, you are definitely right about that. I would've loved to have a PS3 back in the 90's. You know how much that futuristic tech would've been worth? I would've been rich enough to buy a PS3 when it launched in 2006! People back then would've loved the PS3 and if it had been competing 20 years ago at today's price, it would have dominated the industry. So what? The Wii would have done that too. Even just plugging the Wii into last generation would have been huge. It's game library would probably be very different, but it would've been huge.

TrueWiiMaster

#205

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You prefer last gen games over the Wii, and you say that's proof that the Wii is a failure. I say I prefer last gen games over the PS3, and you say I'm wrong. Do you see the contradiction?

Most professional reviewers say Xenoblade, SSBB, Mario Galaxy, Monster Hunter, and Skyward Sword are great by ANY standards.

So you're saying I can't use my experiences with someone else's PS3 and I can't use testimonies from a PS3 owner? And that I can't determine what genres are prevalent on the PS3 simply by looking at its library?

I'm not gonna argue about the PS2 vs the Wii. The Wii is definitely NOT killed by the PS2, but the PS2 was great. I personally prefer the Wii, but I have no qualms with the PS2. Oh, and if you were saying the PS2 beats the Wii graphically, you should get your eyes checked.

Nintendoftw

#206

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Games made on the PS3 are better in the sense that they actually take power to run them and have a heck of a lot more content. I can tell you that ANY wii game could be ran on the Xbox, a last gen system. And that is a shame.

Nintendoftw

#207

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I'm not saying that, but those testimonies are unreliable because relative to me you could be lying, especially since everyone I know that has a Wii isn't a gamer or uses it for parties and nothing else.

Nintendoftw

#208

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Oh and PS2 doesn't beat the Wii graphically of course. But the gamecube is on par with the WIi and the Xbox beats out the Wii graphically. I told you to check out Chronicles Of Riddick, it looks like a 360 game. Or maybe Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory

TrueWiiMaster

#209

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Few games anywhere have more content than Monster Hunter Tri, Xenoblade supposedly has a 60 hour campaign without the sidequests, Skyward Sword is the longest Zelda ever, and Brawl has 35 characters, a full story mode, hundreds of collectibles, a level editor, and online multiplayer. Where in these is the lack of content compared to PS3 games?

Nintendoftw

#210

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Ugh... Really? That content is nothing... Just look at Elder Scrolls: Skyrim... HAs more content than all of those combined. Maybe Little Big Planet... Really any AAA ps3 game has tons more content. Wii's disc limit is what? Over 7 gb? Lol the PS3's is 50 GB... It would be laughable to say Wii games have as much content.

mamp

#211

mamp said:

@TrueWiiMaster and @Nintendoftw Console wars XD
Look both systems are great in their own way yes the Wii itself was downright bad because of its hardware limitations and lack of third party support but it had some amazing games you can't say that its games were bad just because it had no HD and SNES games are still amazing to the point that people still play them today. I don't have a PS3 but I have a 360 which shares the same 3rd party library and yes those games are amazing and they do have good graphics and better AI etc. but that doesn't automatically make better games it just makes a better system because there have been some horrible releases on both the PS3/360. @ TWM Red Dead is amazing and it sold like hot cakes but it is not automatically a shooter just because the main character uses a gun that's like saying Zelda is a hack and slash game because Link uses a sword. More power in a system just makes the system itself better not the actual games both systems have amazing games and they have crappy ones it just depends on how they're made.

TrueWiiMaster

#212

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Trust me, I'm a gamer, and I love the Wii.

Though I could be lying, so could you. I generally take someone at their word online until the prove themselves false. As far as you know, I've never touched a system other than the Wii, and as far as I know you've only ever played the PS3. Neither of us can really prove anything. But if I wanted to lie, I would've said I owned a PS3 myself, and added strength to my argument. The truth is I don't. My brother does, and he shares many of my points.

I don't have to look up Chaos Theory. I've seen plenty of it already. Chronicles of Riddick looks great, but I can't say it looks better than everything on the Wii. I mean, consider Metroid Prime 3 and Monster Hunter!

Nintendoftw

#213

Nintendoftw said:

@mamp But wouldn't you agree better hardware makes for better games? Like Red Dead, would it be the same without the amazing sound quality, large landscapes, ragdoll physics, and huge amount of content that is only possible on powerful systems like the ps3 and 360?

Quake

#214

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Have a good collection of PS3 games. What they have for sale on the market in terms of diversity still doesn't compare to the Wii.

Nintendoftw

#215

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Lol still doesn't compare to the Wii...? You do know the vast majority of Wii games are for toddlers are little kids right? Count how many My Horsez is on the Wii.

mamp

#216

mamp said:

@Nintendoftw Do you hate GTA 3 and Vice City now because they're last gen do they suck now because they're last gen? I think they were awesome games you make it sound like games can't be good unless it's got power behind it. Does that mean Red Dead is gonna suck in the future cuz it's last gen all I'm saying is yes more power adds more to a game but it doesn't automatically make it more amazing than the games that are weaker. Operation Raccoon City came out and it's got power and graphics and it still got horrible reviews it doesn't mean that ORC is better than RE 4 just because of the power.

TrueWiiMaster

#218

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Skyrim is one example of a huge, nearly endless game on the PS3. What are some others? Don't forget, that additional 43 GBs is only present on dual-layer discs, and I doubt every game uses them, and much of the space on the discs is taken up by HD graphics and HD sound. Since the Wii doesn't use the same level of HD, it requires less space. In other words, disc size is not quite as relevant as you might expect to how much content a game has.

As for other AAA PS3 titles with apparently hundreds of hours of content, which games are you referring to?

mamp

#219

mamp said:

@Nintendoftw and @Quake The Wii does have a vast majority of games but I think Nintendoftw would like to see more M rated games I know I would. Look I love Nintendo games to death but I am also 21 yrs old and I can handle a little blood and guts and bad words here and there (and if you're young don't even think about it) but we're not gonna find many of those types of games on the Wii, the only good games I found were No More Heroes, House of the Dead Overkill, and Madworld. I'm not saying Violence makes games better but I'm saying that I'm not a child either and I wouldn't mind playing on a console that can give me that option if I ever wanted to play an M rated game.

TrueWiiMaster

#221

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
On your video (and that video doesn't actually prove anything; for all I know you posted a link to some random person's video and said that was you. Like I said, we can't really prove anything here.) You mention that the PS3 had more high-scoring games while having fewer overall releases, but how many of those high-scoring games were from the same franchises? Specifically, how many were COD? 5? The Wii generally doesn't rely on spammed franchises (while many of its franchises have many games, few have more than 1 or 2 on the Wii).

TrueWiiMaster

#222

TrueWiiMaster said:

@mamp
If you want a more mature title and believe that gore and swearing aren't necessary in such a game, try Monster Hunter, Metroid, Sin and Punishment, Red Steel 2, any of the Resident Evil ports, and Muramasa. These all offer more mature themes/ more challenge for a seasoned adult player.

TrueWiiMaster

#225

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Now we're talking about quality of content. What's better, professionally made monsters (very unique monsters) so big you need to team up online to have a chance of winning, or user made platforming levels. And realistically, do many people play LBP for hundreds of hours? I mean, do you even get anything from beating these fan-produced stages? Or are they just more play time?

Quake

#226

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Sorry for not keeping watch over the games that are "for toddlers [or] little kids." Generally I only keep watch over games that have relevance to my preferences.

TrueWiiMaster

#229

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
COD isn't so much the minority as the biggest offender. Like I said, few games on the Wii have more than two entries. Can the same be said for the PS3? Not really. The following all have 3 games on the PS3: Resistance, Uncharted, and Ratchet and Clank. Assassin's Creed has 4 with the 5th coming this year. Infamous might have 3, depending on how you consider that weird vampire thing (maybe 2.5 games?). This may not seem like many, but these are some of the PS3's biggest franchises. These franchises, plus COD but not counting Infamous, account for about 20 of the PS3's high-scoring games.

TrueWiiMaster

#230

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Actually, I was referring to the additional online-only monsters in Monster Hunter, and they are anything but small. I don't think Xenoblade has any multiplayer. From what I've heard, Xenoblade has some pretty great sidequests, intertwining with characters, the storyline, and other sidequests. What are LBP's great sidequests?

Yeah, those rewards for playing user-generated levels seem kinda paltry. I mean, if you really enjoy making levels or are a little obsessive about trophies, it could be worth it, but the lack of progress would just make the game boring for me.

TrueWiiMaster

#231

TrueWiiMaster said:

And what great E games does the PS3 have? LBP and Modnation? Both are outdone by New Super Mario Bros and Mario Kart.

mamp

#232

mamp said:

@TrueWiiMaster
I have all of those games, you talk to me like IDK any of these games. just because I have a 360 doesn't mean i don't like Nintendo games I'm probably just as much of a fan as you are. All I said was that if I wanted to play Something with some Violence and blood i'd like the option to do so.

mamp

#233

mamp said:

@TrueWiiMaster My wii library off the top of my head= most of 1st party software
okami, TvsC, NMH 1,2, MH Tri, wii RE 4 and 0, madworld, Bully, rayman origins I don't just blab i know what I'm talking about.

TrueWiiMaster

#234

TrueWiiMaster said:

@mamp
Sorry if I came across as condescending. It wasn't my intention. I was just recommending some games I thought you might like if you hadn't played them, based on your post wanting more mature games on the Wii. I never once said you were less a fan than me.

mamp

#235

mamp said:

@ TrueWiiMaster sorry i guess i got a little mad and what i meant was if i did want to play some games with sex, drugs, blood and violence there's not that many for me I am not a console fan I am a gaming fan and I don't care what system or what genre as long as i think it's amazing and that's what gaming should be about. TBH i never thought I'd like some of the games on the Wii or 360 until i tried them and they were amazing like Rhythm Heaven or Skyrim but having an open mind about gaming has led me to discover some great games out there.

mamp

#236

mamp said:

BTW I REALLY wanna play Some MH tri but my Wii data got corrupted and I had to reformat my Wii and I lost EVERYTHING and I was just too discouraged to try and get everything back again. I was a sad panda that day.

TrueWiiMaster

#237

TrueWiiMaster said:

@mamp
I couldn't agree more. I love Nintendo for the games they make more than for the systems. I loved the games on the PS1 and PS2, and, as I've said, enjoyed Halo 2 on the original Xbox. If I enjoy the games, I'll want to get the system to play them. I just don't enjoy the games enough to buy either HD system.

TrueWiiMaster

#238

TrueWiiMaster said:

@mamp
And wow... That stinks. My Wii's been having issues lately (it can't play Brawl for some reason), but I'm hoping it'll last at least until I can get a Wii U, and that I'll be able to transfer over my data.

mamp

#239

mamp said:

@ TrueWiiMaster You probably need a lense cleaner it usually won't let you play dual-layered discs until you clean it out it happened to me when I bought the Metroid Prime Trilogy.

TrueWiiMaster

#240

TrueWiiMaster said:

@mamp
I was planning on trying a lense cleaner at some point, but strangely enough the problem only seems to apply to Brawl. My copy of the Trilogy works fine, but my Wii can't even find Brawl.

SanFrisco9er

#241

SanFrisco9er said:

@TrueWiiMaster Do the other primes have Wifi compalibility, yeah so no thanks.

The ''fact'' am referring to is on the last sentence of the last paragraph of comment #166.

OMFS Starfox!? really? Zelda?Dont even mention Star Wars Rogue Squadron 1 & 2 because the both get easily posterized by night of the old republic 1 & 2 & Star Wars BattleFront 2 and thats a fact.Starfox & Zelda are cartoons you're starting to go off subject, am not debating on which console has the most bueatifully vibrant settings, characters,etc. Am talking about which console has the best graphics as in which looks more realistic & for FF idk nothing about that I only played one on the ps2 and it looked pretty good.F-Zero too I havent played, seen, nor bothered playing but am guessing it's a racing game(correct me if am wrong) and if it is a racing game the XBOX exclusive series PGR and the multiplatform game Burnout 3 that always looks better(graphicly(realistically)) on XBOX consoles easily wins. RE4 & Zero, play DOOM3. Metroid Primes play DOOM3 again or riddick. & finally Pikmin °—° now I can't take you seriously but you still have to play JSRF.

Am just trying to get the point across. I do love my XBOX but C'mon gamecube having better graphics than XBOX is obviously not true.

Do you have to make it that complicated?I know the DS is/was superior to the psp, I was talking about graphics.I can't deny that & You can't deny the multiplatforms looked better on the XBOX.

I asked for your age because I want to see if we are in the same age.& is halo 1 & 2 the only XBOX games you own? My brother bought a used gamecube from gamestop on 2006 an we got 3 games SSBMelee,Sonic Heroes, 4swords(main reason he got it & because it was incredibly cheap) melee is fun but not as fun as the 64 SSB(opinion) probably because everybody wanted to play XBOX/PS2 as an effect of that 4 player was never an option(well for me it wasn't).You'll think am lying but am not :↓Console:Timeline↓:

I have 4 big bros.& 3 little sisters.↓Before i was born↓
1989-1994NES:my big brother owned this one he's now 25
SNES:my second big brother owned this one he's now 23.
1995-2004N64:my brother that is older than me by 3yrs as of now owned this one he's 18.We had two actually he ruined one(it was everybodies(family system)) when everybody was playing(including me) SSB and he didn't get his turn so he got angry and picked it up and threw it to the floor and the system along with the SSB got ruined.So our dad bought him a 64 bundled with Donkey kong 64(i want a remake 4 the 3ds) and a memory expansion pack.
↓after i was born↓
2002-2002DreamCast:IDK who owned this but Sonic adventures & the tony hawk game were cool.
2004-2009PS2:My brother owned this one hes goin to be 20 this month.
2005-2008XBOX:OG:ME am 15
2006-?Gamecube:My brother who's going to be 20 this month owned this one.
2007-2010(redring):Me again.
& my sisters dont have no consoles even though i tried to convince them into getting a wii instead they all got dsi's.

Nintendoftw

#242

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Do not EVER try to say the PS3 has too many reused titles -_-. Nintendo has been using the same formula for ALL of it's games for decades. Tell me the difference between Super Mario 64 and Super Mario galaxy

TrueWiiMaster

#244

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Wi-fi compatibility? You mean online play? No they don't. But that doesn't mean they aren't excellent.

You can't take me seriously because I think the graphics of Pikmin 1 and 2 are on par with Halo's, and here you are telling me that games you've never played on the Gamecube must look worse than games you've played on the Xbox because Xbox games look better? Seriously?

Having the best graphics does not mean having the most realistic graphics. Like I said, they're hard to compare to Halo due to different styles, but you can't just dismiss every non-realistic Gamecube game because of that. They are completely relevant to an argument about graphics. Windwaker looked, and still looks, amazing.

Doom 3 might be the best looking game of last gen, but that doesn't change the fact (as much a fact as your own so-called fact) that Metroid Prime 2 looks far better than Halo 2.

I think you misunderstood what I said. I said the PSP was too much stronger than the DS, graphically, for companies to release the same games on both the PSP and the DS. The Gamecube and Xbox shared many multiplatform games, and therefore the gap between them is much smaller than the gap between the PSP and DS.

I don't own an Xbox, nor any games for it. Most of what I played on it was Halo 2, but I've watched Chaos Theory for hours. From what it sounds like, you haven't really played much on the Gamecube either.

Weird. I have 4 brothers and 3 sisters too, though one of my brothers is younger than me. If you're 15, which is what I think I gathered from your timeline, than no, we're not the same age. I'm the third youngest in my family, and both of my younger siblings are older than 15.

P.S.- I also loved DK64.

TrueWiiMaster

#246

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Super Mario 64 took place in the Mushroom Kingdom, while Mario Galaxy took place in outer space. Mario 64 never had a sequel, but Mario Galaxy did. They each have very different power-ups, bosses, enemies, and levels not found in the other game. And, of course, Mario 64 was on the N64 while Galaxy was on the Wii, meaning very different controls. They may have the same basic formula, but they are actually pretty different.

Besides that though, it should be mentioned that, first of all, there's a difference between reusing a successful formula and releasing almost identical games, and second of all that, like I said, no major Nintendo franchise has more than 2 games on the Wii (unless you count New Super Mario and Galaxy together, which I don't).

There are more differences between Ocarina of Time and Skyward Sword than between Modern Warfare 1, 2, 3, and Black Ops combined. The same goes for every game I mentioned in my example. That's why I accused Playstation of reusing titles. They do. Of course, there's also the fact that all of these games came out in the last 5 years! It took Zelda 25 years to reach 9 console games, counting Four Swords. It took COD 5 years to accumulate 7 games on the PS3, with another coming this year. Assassin's Creed took 4 years to rack up 4 PS3 games, the 5th coming this year.

Of course, Playstation has always gotten tons of entries into its main series. PS1 had 4 Twisted Metals, 3 Crash Bandicoots, plus a racer, 3 Spyros, 3 Tekkens, and 3 Final Fantasy's. The PS2 had 7 .Hack games, 6 Ratchet and Clanks, 3 Jaks, plus a racer, 3 Xenosagas, 3 Sly Coopers, 3 Final Fantasy's, and 3 Tekkens. I'm not saying I don't like these games, just that sometimes looking at just the total numbers can be misleading. What looks like 25 9.0's might actually be 5 or 6 great franchises.

Nintendoftw

#248

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Stop relating COD with the PS brand... That's a multiplat game.
The exact same with just about every other game you mentioned that has a sequel annually. All PS exclusives don't do that, and when they do they definitely do not look identical. And plus you way overdid it with all of the CODs being identical... The different between COD Modern Warfare and COD Modern Warfare 3 is pretty big.

Nintendoftw

#249

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster You should HATE the wii because it will lead to the death of Nintendo. You keep buying everything that has the Nintendo brand on it which tells Nintendo they aren't doing anything wrong. The casual market is completely taken over by smart phones or already have Nintendo Wii systems. The hardcore audience is with PS3/360 because they were betrayed by Nintendo with the release of the Wii. Unless Nintendo decides to get back on track so that more multiplats get put onto the Wii U then Nintendo will DIE as a company. They will get NO sales at all if they use the same tactic as they did with the Wii. The casual market is taken, so no casual sales. The hardcore market won't take another underpowered system with last gen hardware. The core Nintendo fans will buy it to support Nintendo, but the sad truth is that Nintendo has DRASTICALLY less fans than before the release of the Wii. Sure the Nintendo fanbase is still the largest, but it's not big enough to carry the Wii U. What you are doing by buying Nintendo systems that have horrible hardware is telling Nintendo that they are not in danger and the competition does not affect them. When they are in more danger than they ever were before. I refuse to let Nintendo kill itself and become another SEGA

Sir_Deadly

#250

Sir_Deadly said:

@Nintendoftw the wii or wii u will lead to the death of Nintendo??? I seriously doubt Nintendo will leave the gaming industry since they have all that money from the Wii Success. I am pretty sure Wii U will be a big success also since its the only 8th gen console comming out right now. Quite trying to prove points about Nintendo when clearly Nintendo is the biggest success this generation.

TrueWiiMaster

#251

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Really? Last I heard the Wii made Nintendo millions, or was it billions? Am I wrong in saying it outsold both the 360 and PS3? And who are you to tell the makers of such a successful console what will and what won't sell? Also, how do you know if the Wii has fewer fans than the Gamecube? You shouldn't assume everyone thinks the same way you do.

What I'm doing by buying the Wii and its games is tell Nintendo I like their games. It's true. I do like their games. Of course, I don't buy every game released for the Wii. I use my purchases to send a message that I want more games like Donkey Kong and New Super Mario and fewer of the "toddler" games you mentioned earlier.

Ah, you said it. You said hardcore gamers don't play the Wii, that Nintendo betrayed them by not making the Wii stronger. Since you know so much about them, I guess you consider yourself "hardcore"? Your idea is backwards. Actually, real hardcore gamers have Wii's. They play the kinds of games that were hardcore 10, 15, and 20 years ago, games that are almost exclusively on the Wii. You may think nothing's more hardcore than a well-practiced fps fan, but that's not true. You know what's hardcore? Beating Sin and Punishment at a higher difficulty, collecting everything in Donkey Kong Country Returns, getting every "achievement in Super Smash Bros Brawl, and taking down the hardest monsters in Monster Hunter. These take time, effort, skill, and focus to achieve, and that's what makes them hardcore. I'm not saying there are no hardcore PS3/360 players, but the most hardcore games are definitely on the Wii.

Nintendoftw

#252

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Lol funny you keep naming like 3 hardcore wii games. I bet I can count almost all AAA hardcore wii games out myself. Name the most hardcore wii games you can, lol and if you name all of them then no, the wii does not appeal to hardcore gamers at all. And WRONG most hardcore gamers aren't on the Wii, which proves my point even more. You need to get a PS3. Lol. The Wii's games are usually terribly easily. Games like Portal 2 are a real challenge... The only REAL hardcore wii game there is is sin and punishment 2 and maybe a hand full of others rofl.

Nintendoftw

#253

Nintendoftw said:

ANd money left over from the Wii...? You know that money is pretty much gone right...? The Wii U will keep the Wii U in production, NOT the Wii. And Nintendo pretty much does not have a lot of money at all compared to the other 2 competing companies, and that's why Nintendo needs to realize they are ALWAYS in danger of becoming another SEGA, no matter how many consoles they sale. Sony and Microsoft's gaming divisions not making money won't kill them... But Nintendo is a strict gaming company. Nintendo is definitely the best of the three companies but they are also the most arrogant. Because Nintendo doesn't even acknowledge that they have competition.

Nintendoftw

#254

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster No Nintendo isn't the one who produces the toddler games... Okay if Nintendo were to decide to make hold back and wait until Sony or Microsoft releases a new console and then release a console that is perhaps between the two in terms of power, and STILL released the great Nintendo exclusives that we all know then they would NOT have the toddler games. They would get all the multiplatform games and plus they would attract more Nintendo fans.

TrueWiiMaster

#255

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I named 4 hardcore Wii games, not 3, and if you think DKCR is easy, you've probably never beaten it. And those weren't all the hardcore games on the Wii. There's also Punch Out, Excitebots, Fire Emblem and Tatsunoko vs Capcom. I'm sure there's more if I looked. What games on the PS3 would you call hardcore? And by hardcore, I mean challenging. In other words, you can go ahead and remove COD and Battlefield, and any other game that you consider hardcore for being M, having robust online multiplayer, or being long. And try to use exclusives.

As for Nintendo running out of money: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2012/03/nintendo_reportedly_has_8128_billion_yen_in_the_bank
They have plenty. Don't worry.

Of course Microsoft and Sony have more money than Nintendo! They're Microsoft and Sony! But that's not to say they'll sink it all into the video game department to cover huge losses, and it certainly doesn't mean their consoles have been more profitable.

P.S.- I don't need a PS3 to play Portal 2. I have a computer.

Nintendoftw

#256

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Battlefield 3 is pretty hard... Especially since it is primarily an online game. Sniping a jet pilot in BF3 in itself is harder than any game you can think of on the Wii.

Nintendoftw

#257

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I highly doubt your computer is powerful enough to play Portal 2 decently... And I SERIOUSLY doubt you're a PC gaming because you seem to lack basic knowledge of how important technical specifications are in a gaming system. And lol the PS3 version of Portal 2 is the best version

Nintendoftw

#258

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I'm talking long term. Next gen if Nintendo uses the same tactic as this gen, Nintendo will fail the gen and that could put it at serious risk of becoming SEGA.

Nintendoftw

#259

Nintendoftw said:

Pretty much any online game on the PS3 that takes skill, including MW3 even, is hard. Wii's online is horrible so you wouldn't know much about it. You probably would be the one to state that playing BF3 online is easy

TrueWiiMaster

#260

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
The fact that Battlefield's primarily an online game does not make it more hardcore. If anything, it makes it less hardcore. Using a specific weapon to do a specific thing makes this game hardcore to you? Really? That seems a little too... specific... Beating New Super Mario Bros last level without taking any damage or using any power up after wasting the first 200 seconds is really hard too. Probably harder than almost anything on the PS3.

I don't usually use internet abbreviations but...lol. Just because I think a great game relies more on great design than power of the system it's on, I "seem to lack basic knowledge of how important technical specifications are in a gaming system"? Nice. Portal 2 doesn't require a very powerful computer to play. It might not be at the best settings, but if it's really such a great game, slightly diminished textures and lighting shouldn't really detract much. You're right that I'm not a PC gamer though. I just prefer holding a controller over using keyboard and mouse (and yes, I know there are some controllers for PCs). But if I really wanted to play Portal 2, I'd play it on my desktop rather than buy a PS3.

Quake

#261

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw MW3 is cheap. Spawn killing and camping are huge problems, but aside from that it's okay, I still think MW2 is better. BF3 isn't hard once you unlock attachments to reduce your guns recoil, pretty easy actually.

Nintendoftw

#262

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igkU4JonNug

Name me one game that looks as fun and intense as this on the wii, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ANY FIRST PARTY GAMES. Why isn't there any? The Wii isn't powerful enough.

And none of this was staged either, all the destruction is a result of the frost bite 2 engine... Something the Wii can't handle. If it COULD handle it then Wii owners would be able to enjoy this game too.

TrueWiiMaster

#263

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Who should I believe? You telling me Nintendo will fail, or the success they've had so far with the Wii, DS, and 3DS?

I've never played Battlefield 3, but MW3's online is pretty bad, or maybe I should say the community/setup is bad. I was just playing it about a week ago, and all I saw were campers and spawn-kills. It was far to common to spawn, and be killed within seconds. That's not difficulty. That's cheap.

Either way, how hard your online experience is depends on what perks/weapons you've unlocked/purchased and who you're playing with. Two people of equal skill aren't equal if one of them played longer and unlocked a better gun, or worse, bought the unlockables (in Battlefield)! I still can't believe that's an option! And you still call it hardcore?! I can't whip out my credit card to collect everything in Mario. Most online fps's rely on luck, weapons, perks, and lastly, some skill. Far from I'd call hardcore.

Quake

#264

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw You do realize that video is a cut and paste of the most intense portions of an online match. There are many other portions where nothing happens.

@Nintendoftw Yes, Wii owners could enjoy all of the glitches and bugs that game is filled with. Thankfully they won't unless they buy it for another console.

Nintendoftw

#265

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster In BF3 you are supposed to rely on team work to help your team out. There are always numerous circumstances where you have to decide rather to drive to an enemy base and help out your team or go out on your own and capture bases (This option usually gets you killed). Vehicles add a ton to the gameplay and overall structure of the game. BF3 is pretty unique if you were to actually play

@TrueWiiMaster And wrong, all o the weapons on BF3 have different setup and all but they are all completely balanced. Except the automatic shotgun with explosive rounds... But i'm pretty sure the patch fixed that.

@Quake You obviously do not have BF3, because if you did you'd know the majority of matches are exactly like the video, unless the match has a small amount of players, and most servers don't because the game is very alive.

@TrueWiiMaster And please stop comparing Mario dude. I can name countless games that are harder than any mario game. The mario series is insanely fun but none of them are truly hard. Especially the ones released nowadays.

Nintendoftw

#267

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Saying that BF3 has more boring moments than intense moments is the most moronic statement I have ever heard of in my life.

TrueWiiMaster

#268

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
So no weapon you earn later on is better than the weapons you start with?

And how about this video, about 40 seconds in:
<a rel="external" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XvxNCyUGJk">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XvxNCyUGJk</a>

It took me awhile to find a good video. EA sure knows how to make their games look action-packed! Good thing for me Nintendo knows how to make their GAMES action packed. Just kidding. EA's not too bad. Except with DLC and other greed-centered actions. But I was serious about Nintendo making action-packed games... That wasn't the joke.

I was comparing doing specific things in Mario to doing specific things in Battlefield. Either way, you end up with a very difficult task. But no, Mario games, played without special rules or objectives, aren't usually that hard. Of course, neither are online fps's...

Quake

#269

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I never said it had more boring than intense moments. I've yet to experience a match where that much happens continually throughout the match.

Nintendoftw

#270

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Yeah but online FPS games aren't the only thing the PS3 offers. I mean even though Red Dead Redemption isn't very hard I can't stress how good of a game it is. Just the fact that is is ON the PS3/360 should make you want one.

@Quake I have lol. You obviously don't play much.

@TrueWiiMaster http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19N75TL1dHU&ob=av3e (CHANGED THE REVIEW, SORRY THIS ONE IS BETTER)

This is a review of the game. And just for icing on the cake the reviewer of the game is a Nintendo fan! Just check it out, just one example of an amazing game available on the "hardcore" systems.

Quake

#271

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Depends on what you call playing much. I played MW2 14 or so days on 360, 1 or so days on PS3. I've played Bad Company 2 about 1 day as well. I've only played BF3 about 5 hours. But that's just because though the game is at ver. 1.04 it plays like a beta with glitches and bugs galore.

Nintendoftw

#272

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake The story mode is not what you buy a game like COD or Battlefield 3 for... EA barely put much thought into the single player. Let me guess, you haven't even got online...

TrueWiiMaster

#273

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
To be honest, when I first saw Red Dead advertised I thought it looked awesome, but I later found out it had content I wouldn't want to play. Let's just say that, from what I've heard, it earned its M rating, and then some. If that wasn't the case, I'd consider getting it, if I ever had a system it was released on. I wouldn't buy a system for it.

Whatever happened to that list of hardcore PS3 games I asked for? Didn't you say there were tons of games on the PS3 more hardcore than anything on the Wii?

And as it so happens, I like that particular reviewer. I was already a subscriber.

Quake

#274

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Yeah, I can't imagine buying a AAA shooter by EA or Activision only for the campaign. Actually that's only counting online. The single player has glitches unique to it as well. I estimate a little over half finished with the campaign.

Nintendoftw

#275

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster So you don;t like it because it;s too violent -_-. It's no more violent than GTA IV. And WAKE UP. You don't live in an E rated world.

And almost any game can be hardcore when it's setting is on hard... And with this logic:

  • God Of War 3
  • Dante's Inferno
  • GTA IV (At certain points)
  • Portal 2
  • Dead Space 2
  • Resistance 3
  • Batman Arkham Asylum
Nintendoftw

#276

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake The multiplayer has a few glitches, but since the patch update there are no glitches that affect the online gameplay.

Quake

#277

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw There are still glitches in the multiplayer. MAV glitch anyone? Not to mention how many tries it takes to climb over a wall.

TrueWiiMaster

#278

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
It's not really the violence that keeps me from playing it... It doesn't look as violent as many games on the market. Comparing it to GTA 4 means nothing to me. I have absolutely no interest in any GTAs on principle. And I can play whatever games I want. The world may not be E rated, but that doesn't mean I want to entertain myself with more of the world. If I prefer games with fewer/milder warnings in the ESRB box that's up to me. Even if everyone else was playing games well-deserving of their M rating, that would have no influence on what I play.

Only two of those are exclusive to the PS3, but whatever. You really think all of those are hard? Really hard? Hard enough that you will lose/die often? So hard that you need practice to beat them?

Nintendoftw

#279

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster You don't practice to beat any game -_-. But yes they are all that hard. Especially Dead Space 2... I'm playing on normal mode and it's frustrating because i'm stuck on one level and I have low health, low ammo, and no money to buy either. And it seems to happen often too.

Nintendoftw

#280

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake How many tries it takes to climb over a wall? Well you're the only one there dude... The only glitch I have is that you can leap over stairs, which is pretty awkward feeling.

Quake

#281

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Generally takes 2-3 tries to climb over a wall. Either way, this game should have had no glitches at the latest 1.01. They didn't fix the heavy texture popping either.

Nintendoftw

#282

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And saying that games like Monster Hunter compare to LA Noire http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc_Mww4Ra5k&feature=fvwp&NR=1 Is just laughably funny... I mean seriously, the 3DS, a handheld, handled a port of Monster Hunter Tri... I mean sure that doesn't mean anything to you, but the Wii, a home console, shouldn't have handhelds overtaking it... Handhelds are awesome sure, but when they beat out consoles theres a serious problem. How are you not bothered that the PSVita is miles ahead of the Wii in terms of power... Being a next gen handheld doesn't mean much either. Considering that the PS3/360 are both more powerful than the Vita.

Nintendoftw

#283

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Yes, when the screen turns colors. Not every game is perfect I suppose, but that doesn't distract from the fact that BF3 is an AAA game.

TrueWiiMaster

#284

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Before I respond to your latest post, I didn't notice that you said, "almost any game can be hardcore when it's setting is on hard". What makes a game hardcore is not having to crank it up to the highest difficulty to make it hardcore. Every game I mentioned as a hardcore Wii exclusive is hard without changing the setting. Sin and Punishment is hard even on easy, and becomes nearly impossible when you raise it to the highest difficulty, which is why I mentioned that before.

If you don't believe me about Sin and Punishment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh8Ej1FyJDo

You have to practice if you want to beat Punch Out, Monster Hunter, Excitebots, Smash Bros Brawl (achievement-wise), and you better believe that some of the harder levels in DKCR will require many tries before you become good enough to beat them. And that's without a difficulty setting.

Your problem in Dead Space seems more like a planning error than actual difficulty. I mean, if you had plenty of health and ammo right now, would it be hard?

SanFrisco9er

#285

SanFrisco9er said:

@TrueWiiMaster No I meant Wifi compalibility.

First of all what is a pikmin and what is the point of either game if there's any. Second, were those the only games that could be compared to HALO 1?

WTF do you even mean ''having the best graphics does not mean having the most realistic graphics''.

XBOX's Star Wars being better looking than gamecubes Star Wars is proven to be a fact(not my fact).

Name one if not some multiplatorms(that came out on all three systems) that look better on the gamecube. I could name 1(2 actually) game that could've been a multiplat but couldn't because the PS2 & gamecube were too weak and wasn't as powerful as the XBOX:OG so the game(s) became XBOX exclusive the game is called Farcry:Instincts. You have to play this game either for OG or 360.& am pretty sure XBOX had the best versions of Multiplatform games.

So pretty much you have very little knowledge of XBOX:OG. Don't get me wrong I haven't played gamecubes greatest game(am looking at you Viewtiful JOE) but still you only played 1 game & watched hours of splinter cell(0.o)?

So now you finally get the point XBOX:OG DEMOLISHES the lunchbox.
So from that paragraph you must be 34?whow...

Quake

#286

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw If it fits your definition of a AAA game then okay. After re-thinking it I don't really know if BF3 fits the AAA category for me. A massive budget yes, but the glitches (maybe bugs instead of glitches, depending on what a glitch is by definition) in the game are just as massive.

TrueWiiMaster

#287

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Interesting that you would mention it that way. The next gen portable from Nintendo can get ports from the Wii, and that's further evidence of the Wii's weakness, right? From what I understand, the Vita can handle PS3 games, or at least that's what Sony's been saying, so let me ask you, should the PS3, a home console, have handhelds overtaking it? Not to mention that the PS4 is at least a year or more away, while the Wii U will be out before long.

And Monster Hunter compares well to just about any game ever made. It has great gameplay, high difficulty, replayability, a huge world, online, customization, and is overall just great. How long does LA Noir take? Is it challenging?

Nintendoftw

#288

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster The planning is what makes the game difficult. On the hardest difficulty you have to plan out everything as you go on, and it being a horror games leaves no time for planning.

Nintendoftw

#290

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Did you look at the link I showed you?

Monster Hunter is AMAZING. In last gen standards...

If I were to compare Monster Hunter Tri and Skyrim in terms of level of detail and amount of time put into the games who would get the vote? Skyrim.

The fact that Skyrim has insane amounts of content and has graphics, story, and sound as icing on the wonderful cake makes it on a completely different level compared to Monster Hunter, which has lackluster sound, graphics, and to some extent, story. Sure the core gameplay is equal if not better than Skyrim, but it has no icing, and is dry in comparison.

Quake

#291

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I can't see how Deadspace is difficult considering they let you melee. Played it before and just went through the game melee killing everyone. The whole concept of easy button melee in a horror game takes away the suspense and removes some of the point of a gun.

Nintendoftw

#292

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake You only named two glitches... How is that considered massive?

And BF3 isn't considered AAA by my standards, but just about everyone who's ever reviewed it's standards lol.

Nintendoftw

#293

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Melee doesn't do anything... Sure it's a nice thing to have and decently powerful. The problem is that your enemies can also melee, and their melee is atleast 5x the power of your own, Heck if one gets 4 to 5 hits on you then you die.

TrueWiiMaster

#294

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Umm, I'm not 34... far from it... I think your math is a little messed up...

Pikmin is an extremely fun and innovative time-management real time strategy game. If you'd seriously like to hear more, just ask.

I'd say they're comparable to or better than Halo 2.

For one, Beyond Good and Evil.

No, I have some knowledge, just not much experience.

The Lunchbox has yet to be defeated!

Nintendoftw

#295

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Saying that you "played it before" I can imply that you don't own it and you have not finished the game. And you can't finish the entire game with melee attacks even if it's on easy difficulty -_-.

@TrueWiiMaster I've got to say in terms of games the Gamecube is more comparable to the PS2 than Xbox... Xbox was a gen ahead in terms of tactics and that's why it got the fewest sales. It had online FPS games and good graphics before it was cool.

Quake

#296

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Nope, don't own it, played. Very mediocre game, in terms of scares, atmosphere and puzzles. Much rather play hard from the start games like RE (classics, not the fake RE4 and RE5) and Dino Crisis. Extermination is also good.
I would need to play it some more to say whether or not they removed the glitches. I plan on trading it in next week, though. Just not a good game, I liked BC2 but that eventually got old. BF3 had glitches the moment I started playing and that really tainted the whole experience.
AAA is relative I suppose. I'm not gonna say it's good just b/c most reviewers say it is, given my experience with it.

TrueWiiMaster

#297

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
No I didn't actually... I forgot to watch it while I was typing my response. I've watched it now, and my opinion stands.

Even if I admit that Skyrim's better than Monster Hunter, that wouldn't magically push Monster Hunter into an outdated level. Sure Skyrim's long, probably longer than almost every console game ever created, and it looks pretty good. I'd say sound couldn't be determined so easily, as Monster Hunter, like many Wii games, has an excellent soundtrack. Just because it's not playing through optical doesn't mean it's not as good. Likewise, Monster Hunter's far from a slouch when it comes to length. Just because it doesn't match up against one of the longest games ever doesn't mean much. It still has more content than most PS3 games.

Besides, you're using your flawed categories again. Not all games benefit from a story, so just because one game has a great story while another almost completely lacks one doesn't make one game better than the other. Monster Hunter didn't need a deep story.

SanFrisco9er

#299

SanFrisco9er said:

How is my math messed up you only gave like 1 # which was 15?

You said DOOM3 best graphics last gen end of story.

Nintendoftw

#300

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster True. By sound I didn't mean soundtrack, I mean how you could hear swords clashing and stuff like that. The crunch of the ground beneath your feet. Deep sound detail. It makes for a great experience.

TrueWiiMaster

#301

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
If I give you one number, 15, and you magically turn it into 34, you messed up somewhere. I'm not 34. I'm not even close to 30.

Yeah I did. Doom 3 looked great. id did a great job, and I give them more credit than the Xbox. Even so, Halo 2 was still outdone by many Gamecube games. End of story.

TrueWiiMaster

#303

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Monster Hunter may not have HD foot-crunching sounds, but it does have them as I recall, and there's certainly plenty of sound effects from the character, environments, and monsters.

Quake

#304

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Unfortunately you're probably right about it being basically the only horror game this generation. Ever since RE went the path of not scary there hasn't been any good scary games. Since Konami contracts out companies to make Silent Hill games, they've gotten worse as well. However, being the only one doesn't make Dead Space good. Amnesia for PC is scarier.

TrueWiiMaster

#306

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Ahh, how about variety. The Xbox OG had some (the least of the generation) but the 360 seems to have almost none. Or if you have a better idea, feel free to start.

Nintendoftw

#308

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Very true... But PC gaming is another thing all together... Hell, it's on a different level than PS3/360, so I can't imagine how much it demolishes the Wii.

Quake

#310

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Actually it doesn't look as good as you might think. It probably could run on Wii. Definitely could run on PS3 and 360. I'm fairly certain it didn't have a massive publisher or developer, and it's more terrifying than most any horror game. But horror is also relative to the person playing.

TrueWiiMaster

#312

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Umm...Hmmm...The Wii sold well? The PS3 was slow to start and the 360 got an early start (which btw caused it to use a fairly outdated graphics chip). Or perhaps about the 360 selling systems made for online gaming but charging extra for online gaming? Despite being marginally better than the PS3 online interface-wise, if that.

TrueWiiMaster

#314

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Oh, the Gamecube? I'm not sure the sales for that gen are as interesting... I mean, the PS2 won sales numbers by a landslide, but I think the Gamecube and Xbox were pretty close, with Gamecube winning in the end. Did the original Xbox also charge for online?

Quake

#317

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I'd love to see the proof you have of that. Games are not necessarily an accurate representation of graphical capabilities. It depends on the developer more than anything. All of the 3rd party graphical power house devs are allocating most of their sources on PC, PS3 and 360. If the same developers were to put the same effort to work on a game specifically for the Wii it would look a lot better than most people think. So unless you have the Wii's specs from Nintendo or a trust-worthy dev there's not much that can be said.

TrueWiiMaster

#320

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Okay, so it did. Like I aid, they were pretty close. I know the Gamecube was ahead at one point, and I guess the Xbox took the lead. Interestingly enough, while I was checking the numbers on wikipedia, I noticed the N64 outsold both.

Quake

#321

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Xbox has according to Wiki a 733 MHz processor. Wii has no processor number listed.

@Nintendoftw If you click the names it says it's 243 MHz. But it was never confirmed by any real authority on the subject.

TrueWiiMaster

#322

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Your motto. Counting the name Wii U, the display box would have the name Wii on it at least 3 times. Someone would probably get confused and expect 3 Wiis to be inside...

Nintendoftw

#324

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Yup. And that's only CPU processing. Btw the Wii processor is 729 MHz, at least that's the rumor. GPU on the Xbox is also more powerful than the Wii's... Overall Xbox is a bit more powerful than the Wii.

Quake

#325

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw If it's just by a really small margin like 4 MHz then it's barely even worth noting. Plus the xbox was limited by the DirectX of the time. The Wii (probably isn't DirectX based) has much newer software.

miletich3

#328

miletich3 said:

You know what? I'm just gonna wait until E3 2012 because I dont trust this garbage at all.

Quake

#329

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Chaos Theory is definitely a gorgeous game, played it so much that was borderline ridiculous. I still think Doom 3 is the best looking game on xbox b/c it had such amazing lighting, bump mapping and gooey textures, not to mention mega textures. id has the best coders in the industry, so it almost seems unfair to compare most other games to them. But it all still comes down to 3rd party devs not making graphically amazing games for the Wii.

@Nintendoftw I'm finished for now, going to sleep, be back tomorrow.

Nintendoftw

#330

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Why don't they? Because the Wii isn't taken seriously. Why isn't it taken seriously? It's an underpowered joke of a system.

TrueWiiMaster

#331

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
If it's not taken seriously, then why did Capcom release Monster Hunter, previously exclusively on Sony systems, only on the Wii? And Tatsunoko vs Capcom? Why did Ubisoft make Red Steel 2 exclusive to the Wii? Especially now that every system has motion controls? And how about Epic Mickey and Sonic Colors? Both of those were high profile games that could have been multi-platform, but were exclusive to the Wii.

The Wii has many great 3rd party games, but they unfortunately tend to sell poorly due simply to the hulking competition that is Nintendo's 1st party support. They may not look as good as Doom 3, but they are more unique and/or innovative than 90% of what's released on the HD systems. (Should that be a new category for what it takes to be an excellent game?) Games like Zack and Wiki, Muramasa, Boom Blox, Deadly Creatures, Trauma Center, and A Boy and His Blob. These were all great games, and very unique, but paled next to Nintendo's excellent releases, at least on the shelf.

BTW, did you ever think of any REAL hardcore games on the PS3?

Sir_Deadly

#332

Sir_Deadly said:

All this arguing is really unnecessary! We all kno the Wii is the number one console for this gen, regardless of what others think. The numbers are there to prove it.

Nintendoftw

#333

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I already made the list Also, almost all of the games you said are NOT innovative... They've almost all been done before, yup, even boom blox. Look up a PC game called Roblox... And plus the Wii doesn't have any innovative games either... They have ALL been done before. Motion control has been done before... Sony did it back in 2001! Not only with the eyetoy but PS Move is a very old peripheral... Also I could use an even better argument- Why isn't the newest Mortal Combat on the Wii? Why isn't GTA IV on the Wii? Why isn't Red Dead Redemption on the Wii? Why isn't Dante's Inferno on the Wii (ROFL it's on the PSP and not the Wii, and the PSP is weaker than the Wii), and why isn't Battlefield 3 on the Wii? The Wii is considered a joke to most actually GOOD developers... One of the best gaming developers in the industry, Rockstar, wouldn't even considered putting one of their amazing games on the garbage that is the Wii.

Nintendoftw

#334

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And don't try to use how Nintendo exclusives overshadow any others... Aren't you aware that PLAYSTATION and XBOX has exclusives too...?

@Assassin87 This site isn't made for Wii owners. It's made for Nintendo fans. The Wii was the biggest disappointment of this gen BY FAR. Underestimating the importance of power is the dumbest decision Nintendo has ever made in it's lifetime, even worse than the virtual boy decision.

SanFrisco9er

#335

SanFrisco9er said:

@Assassin87 Ever heard of Console Wars yeah it's not arguing it's more like debating. If feels really great once you prove someone wrong. cough•TrueWiiMaster•cough•cough You should try it jk.

@Nintendoftw Example of a incredible 360 exclusive:Gears of War: that game was mindblowing when I first played it.

Quake

#336

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw You do realize Wiki is not a reliable source. The Wi''s specs have not been released to the general public and that's what it boils down to. Third parties can try to clock the system but who's to say whether what they do is correct or not flawed in some way? No one. But if you wanna believe un-proven theories then okay, be my guest.

Quake

#337

Quake said:

@SanFrisco9er Gears 1 is not an exclusive to consoles, it was ported to the PC as well. And if you don't think that to be a legitimate answer to it's disuse in this conversation there's another really condemning factor that Gears 1 possesses. Ridiculous glitches that still haven't been patched. Kung-fu flip, weapon slide, roadie run and random reload to name some of the most used and abused. Since very few people ever buy a 360 game just for the single player they should have great glitch-free multi-player, but they don't.

Nintendoftw

#338

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake The fact that the Wii's graphics are inferior to the Xbox's is proof in itself. It has NOTHING to do with developers... Absolutely ZERO. No one would waste money on making a game if they know the console is a joke.

TrueWiiMaster

#339

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
No, you made a list of games that are hard when the difficulty is cranked up. Few to none of them are hard when playing through on the default settings.

Trauma Center, Boom Blox, and Deadly Creatures were all innovative, and if you think Boom Blox and Roblox are the same, I have to assume you've never played Boom Blox (sorry to use one of your favorite lines). Roblox is more like Minecraft, while Boom Blox is a first person puzzle game. Also, note that I said "unique and/or innovative". And/or. Not every game I mentioned was innovative, though they were all unique. Did you really think I'd call A Boy and His Blob, an excellent remake of an innovative NES game, innovative? It's a great game, and there's nothing like it anywhere but on Wii, but it can't really be called innovative when it's a remake.

The eyetoy was terrible. Not only was it rarely used, but it just didn't work well. I remember trying it with a baseball game, and in order to run the bases you had to flap your arms to run. That's hard to compare to swinging a sword in Red Steel 2 or aiming your gun in the conduit. And the PS Move has only been available in America for less than 2 years. How is that old? Besides, Nintendo did it first with their less than perfect Power Glove. Neither the Eyetoy nor the power glove are comparable to the Wii Remote in motion controlled gaming. It alone innovated shooters, point-and-click adventures, and virtual interaction in general.

Those games weren't released on the Wii because it didn't have enough power for direct ports and the developers didn't think it worth it to make new versions for the Wii. Okay, I answered your questions, so why aren't the great 3rd party Wii games on anything else? It's not because of power restrictions or incompatible peripherals. So why then? Is it because HD gamers prefer more traditional games and gun-toting sandboxes?

The DS was underpowered compared to the PSP, and yet Rockstar still released GTA Chinatown Wars on Nintendo's portable before releasing it on the PSP. Power isn't the most important thing to them either.

And don't forget, though Rockstar is a great developer, they're only one among many, and Nintendo's far above them.

If "GOOD" developers consider the Wii a joke, what does that make Capcom, creator of Street Fighter, Monster Hunter, Resident Evil, and Mega Man? How about Team Ninja? EA? Ubisoft? Activision? You're running out of major developers here.

Great point there. I couldn't have said it better myself. Sony and Microsoft both have exclusives, but they don't overshadow other games the way Nintendo's 1st party exclusives do. That might be because, whether you're buying Halo, Gears of War, Killzone, Resistance, COD, or Battlefield, you're getting a shooter. I'm not saying they aren't unique from one another, but they certainly aren't as unique from each other as Mario and Zelda are from 3rd party games. No one offers the same experience as Nintendo, but you can find a dozen current shooters on the PS3 and 360. Plus, Nintendo has heritage. When people see a Mario or Zelda or Donkey Kong on the shelf, they know it's great, whereas many less-known 3rd party games are a risk. And then there's nostalgia to consider!

P.S.- Dante's Inferno being on the HD systems and he PSP has no relevance. EA made an HD version, not compatible with the Wii, and a portable version, which wasn't good enough for the Wii. So what? They didn't think it worth it to make a third version for the Wii.

@SanFrisco9er
You should really get that cough checked. It sounds a little infected and wrong.

@Nintendoftw
"Underestimating the importance of power is the dumbest decision Nintendo has ever made in it's lifetime..."

Even though it produced by far the most successful console of this generation, made Nintendo richer than ever, and innovated the gaming industry?

Quake

#340

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Based off of your comment it's completely logical for me to say that you think EA, Capcom, Ubi and the numerous other developers/publishers are no-bodies because they made/make games for the Wii. That also means that you enjoy playing a game (Deadspace 2) that was made by a no-body, AKA EA.

Nintendoftw

#341

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Lol yeah sure they might port a few games to the wii because they know Nintendo fans are interested in games like marvel vs capcom... And others reasons might be that they just want some money, and developing for the wii is easy. Although Nintendo exclusives are more popular, that still is no excuse at all. Ratchet And Clank are pretty big, and has just as much ability as Donkey Kong to overshadow releases (Not as much as Mario or Zelda of course), and although sales are leaps over the average PS3 game, do you see more mature games taking drastic hits?

Nintendoftw

#343

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And wrong, the list primarily had games that were hard in general... And the ones with difficulty settings are hardcore too, a heck of a lot more hardcore than Monster Hunter

TrueWiiMaster

#344

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
None of the games I mentioned were ports. They're all Wii exclusives from 3rd parties. As far as money being reason to develop on the Wii, why do you think developers make games on the PS3? Ratchet and Clank can't compare to the fame and notoriety of Donkey Kong, one of gaming's oldest icons.

What do you mean by "do you see more mature games taking drastic hits?" Are you talking about how M games on the PS3 aren't affected by Ratchet and Clank? Because, like I said, Ratchet and Clank doesn't hold a candle to many Nintendo franchises by way of fame, quality (I like Ratchet and Clank, but it's true), popularity, and nostalgia. The Nintendo effect is one only Nintendo really has, because no other company has been successfully releasing great games as long as them. They hold the majority share when it comes to great classic game franchises.

The power glove allows the player to "perform various hand motions to control a character on-screen". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Glove
It might not be much, but controlling a game with hand motions other than pressing buttons/joysticks is still motion gaming. The eyetoy wasn't the first motion gaming device, and like I said it was a failure compared to the Wii remote.

So even though the Wii remote was the first remote to allow players to actually point their gun at the screen and target enemies (unless you count additional peripherals like the lightguns seen in Time Crisis and Duck Hunt), and the first remote to allow pointing and clicking in point and click games, and the first remote to accurately act as a sword the player can swing, it's not innovative? Even though Sony made an extremely similar remote to allow Wii-like gameplay on the PS3 because it had something to offer that a dual analog couldn't? Even though, for the first time, it gave players an invisible extra control along with their buttons? Even though it was the first controller to itself accurately act as a steering wheel? What ISN'T innovative here?

I don't know when the name Wii was thought of, but motion gaming was on Nintendo's mind for years before the Wii was released. Hence the power glove.

Nintendoftw

#345

Nintendoftw said:

Oh and Rockstar developed for the DS because the DS isn't a joke... It's not weaker than the gameboy. While the wii is weaker than a last gen system. Plus the fact that mature ds games are more common than mature wii games...

TrueWiiMaster

#346

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Difficulty settings don't make a game hardcore. If it did, than like you said before, almost every game would be hardcore.

Of the games you mentioned:
Batman isn't that hard.
From what you've said, smart planning and conservation would make Dead Space not hard
Portal 2, as I understand it, is a puzzle game in which you have all the time in the world to solve puzzles. Correct me if I'm wrong. That's no harder than a difficult crossword.
Resistance 3 offers co-op to make the game substantially easier, or did they remove that since Resistance 1?
GTA 4 you yourself said is only hard at some parts.
I've never heard of God of War being hard, but it seems some collectables are difficult to get, so it might work
Dante's Inferno, from what I gleaned from the IGN review, is anything but hard

Would you like to try again?

And Monster Hunter is definitely harder than most or all of those games. Some of the monsters take significant preparation and hours of practice to beat. But then, you said you never practice to beat a game, right? Maybe your idea of hard isn't as hard as you think.

TrueWiiMaster

#347

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Actually, according to Gamestop, the Wii has more than 3 times the M games the DS has, (37 to 11).

You have yet to produce evidence that the Wii IS weaker than any of the last gen consoles. What's more, the power difference you claim to be there and claim to be so important only amounts to a few MGHz out of over 700!

Also, it would have to be compared to the GBA, not the Game Boy, and the case would be completely different because the DS was the GBA's successor. Of course it's more powerful! The Wii is absolutely more powerful than its predecessor! And as far as I can tell it's as powerful as the Xbox too, maybe better!

Quake

#348

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I take it you've never perused a list of mature DS games and then compared the number to mature Wii games. Wii - Alone in the Dark, Black Ops, MW3, World at War, Cursed Mountain, Dead Rising, Dead Space: E, Madworld, Manhunt 2, No More Heroes 1 and 2, Obscure, Darkside Chronicles, Umbrella Chronicles, Silent Hill: SM, Double Agent and Tenchu. That amounts to be 16, and I skipped some. The DS has 999, Dementium 1 and 2, GTA, Theresia, Touch the Dead, RE: DS, Crime Scene, Ultimate Mortal Kombat and Shin Megami Tensei: SJ. Which amounts to be 11. Quite obviously the DS had less mature titles than the Wii.

Nintendoftw

#349

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster You've never even played any of them yourself rofl. Yes, Dead Space 2 is hard BECAUSE of that. Batman Arkham City is also difficult, have you even played it? It's about maybe 50/50 but still a fun but difficult game. God of War and Dante's Inferno are both equal in difficulty, especially with the inferno difficulty and the god difficulty set on each one. And about 50-45% of games nowadays don't even have difficulty settings...

@Quake You obviously misread the comment... By mature games I didn't mean rated M, I was talking about games that weren't aimed at children... And about 55-60% of all of the Wii's library is for children. That is pathetic. I admit the DS has it's fair share of childish games, but the DS has more games than the Wii, and the good outweighs the bad. I would take my DS over my piece of garbage Wii any day.. Especially since unlike the Wii, the DS is a REAL successor to the gameboy. The Wii practically is a gamecube 1.5 (Literally)

@TrueWiiMaster If you were to also look at the GPU specs for each of the system you'd fine the Xbox's to be superior as well, not only in processing power but in shading affects and fogging affects. The Wii is pathetic. If the Wii was more powerful than the Xbox but yet the Xbox comes close it would STILL be pathetic, NO next gen system should be even comparable in power to the last gen systems... And the Xbox managed to one up the Wii even though the technology is from 2001, heck rofl even earlier than 2001 because 2001 was only the release date...

@TrueWiiMaster The Wii is weaker than the Xbox, in GPU and CPU... And the Xbox's graphics card is capable of doing more. Lol the only thing the Wii's GPU MIGHT have over the Xbox's is that it is capable of doing better bump mapping, overall, although not by a lot, the Xbox is more powerful than the Wii..

Games like Dead Space were originally designed for the original Xbox but since he Xbox died it was put on the Xbox 360.... And telling from Dead Space beta on the Xbox, the graphics were no different than they were on the 360.

Although it is bad quality, you can't see a huge difference at all. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuOBsih6Os0

@TrueWiiMaster You don't practice to beat any games, unless it's an RTS or anything that takes tactics... And although I have to admit I haven't played Monster Hunter, but no game where you beat monsters up with clubs is nearly as tough as ANY of the games I listed.

Quake

#350

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I can't see how that is in any way a misreading on my part considering you specifically wrote "mature" which is what the "M" rating stands for. It must be a poor choice of words on your part.

TrueWiiMaster

#351

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You said, Arkham Asylum, not Arkham City. Though I haven't played any of those games personally, my brother played Arkham Asylum thoroughly, and I watched a fair amount. It's not that hard. I'd imagine Arkham City's difficulty's about the same.

According to IGN, Dante's Inferno wasn't that hard. They even said that most enemies in the game can be taken out with one hit, and the "harder" enemies can be beaten with simple combos. The "inferno" mode you mentioned is also in their review. They said that after you beat it you can play it again on a higher difficulty, carrying over your upgrades/exp/weapons/whatever this game uses into it. Not hardcore.

Like I said before, God of War might work if you go after the hardest collectables.

Those elements that make Dead Space hard don't sound that hard, but I've never played it. I tend to conserve everything in games anyway, so I don't know how much they would affect me. Conserving healers and ammo is common in horror games. The original Resident Evils gave you no more than you needed. If you wasted it, things would get tough.

If you look up the Xbox and Wii on Wikipedia, for lack of a more reliable site, you get the following (you have to click on the chips for the Wii's data):
Wii CPU: 729 MHz
Xbox CPU: 733 MHz
Wii GPU: 243 MHz
Xbox GPU: 233 MHz

As you can see the Wii has a higher GPU. So you were wrong about that. Also worth noting is that, while these Xbox numbers seem to be exact, the Wii's numbers aren't certain. There has been no official confirmation on the Wii's power; these are what people have found.

The Wii might be pathetic power-wise compared to the PS3 and 360, but it has them both beat in software, so I can't say it's a pathetic system.

Is it worth pointing out that the DS has many of the same shovelware and toddler games that get released on the Wii? Like you said, it's an awesome system, but it has plenty of games that aren't worth the first look they get, let alone the double take. Rather than focus on power, Nintendo added a second screen and made it touch sensitive. Innovation over power. That's what games are all about!

TrueWiiMaster

#352

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
If you still have your Wii, you should definitely try Monster Hunter. It looks easier than it is. There's plenty of strategy involved, plus a ton of skill. Some monsters took me 4 or 5 tries to beat, with each try lasting over 30 minutes. If that's not practicing to get better, I don't know what is.

You HAVE to practice to get some of the trophies in Brawl, and it would be nigh impossible to beat every stage in Excitebots without redoing some of them several (or more) times! Punch Out! is a game all about fighting opponents until you've learned their moves well enough to beat them. Practice!

Quake

#353

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw First off, Batman AA was easy, yet to play it on hard, but on normal the combat relies heavily on waiting for an opening, which requires some degree of patience. Quake 1 on nightmare without cheats is where real difficulty is, but that's another story.
I highly doubt you crunched the numbers to get the percentage you have in your post, but who knows, maybe you did. Assuming it is a fake percentage I could come up with one that is representative of the PS3 in relation to what you consider games aimed towards the "mature" audience and say that it's "pathetic" and the conversation wouldn't move, just like how it is with your comment. So your comment was pointless.
Graphics don't really make a game experience better. I could play Bad Company 2 (even though it is graphically weaker than Battlefield 3) and have as good a time or maybe even better.

@Nintendoftw You do realize that shaders and fog effects are not part of the system, they are part of the software. Proof of this is with Chaos Theory. During the development process they added new shader software to the game. You should have seen it before the newer shaders, lighting looked like Pandora Tomorrow.

grimbldoo

#354

grimbldoo said:

1, they are anonymous and 2, they say this, "Wii U Not as Powerful as Wii." obviously trolls.

Nintendoftw

#355

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster The Wii doesn't have ANYTHING beaten in software. It has the most shovelware out of any system ever made.... You simply do not have a current gen system (The wii isn't current gen, it's a gamecube 1.5). Playing and watching a couple of games means nothing if you can't dig deep into them and enjoy them... Five hours on a system with multiple games would lead me to believe you've played one hour of each game. That's DEFINITELY not enough time to actually evaluate anything. Quake is in a better position to argue.

Also before saying the Wii is more powerful look at this: <a rel="external" href="http://www.avforums.com/forums/xbox/1141405-whats-more-powerful-original-xbox-wii.html">http://www.avforums.com/forums/xbox/1141405-whats-more-powerful-original-xbox-wii.html</a>

Seems like it could be either, they keep going back and forth and each comes up with a valid argument... The fact that I can compare the Wii with the original Xbox is pathetic. Wii is supposed to be current gen, yet the Xbox is equal to or has the Wii beat in terms of power...

@Quake Yeah and i'll say it too: The PS3's library is at least 50% rated M games... And the amount of GOOD games is at least 65% rated M games... But I would rather have that than games that are aimed at children...

Nintendoftw

#356

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Oh and yes it is in the software, but also in the graphics card.. For example, the 3DS's graphics chip's specialty is in fogging effects, check out RE: Revelation's fog.

Nintendoftw

#357

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake And Batman Arkham City (I mistakenly put Arkham Asylum, I don't own it so I can't judge) is hard... I was talking about on the hard difficulty setting. And rather a game has difficulty settings doesn't mean that it isn't hardcore, because batman arkham city is hard to complete fully rather it's on easy, normal, or hard.

TrueWiiMaster

#358

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
As I said before, the Wii isn't current tech-wise, but that doesn't mean it's not current gen. It was released this gen, it outsold its competitors, and it produced many excellent new games, many of which would have been impossible on last gen's tech.

Yes the Wii has a lot of shovelware. How does that affect how many great games it has? Just considering its great games, it has more variety, innovation, and creativity than either HD system, and software's what really matters. Last gen, the PS2 had the most shovelware. Does that mean it lost software-wise to the Gamecube and Xbox? Come to think of it, it was the weakest last gen too (unless you count the Dreamcast). Why wasn't it a failure?

What other random people say in a discussion similar to ours isn't proof for anyone's case. According to what wikipedia says (it may not be reliable, but I don't know of a more reliable source on this subject) the Wii had a stronger GPU by 10 MHz and a weaker CPU by 4 MHz based on assumed maximums on the Wii. If that's true, no amount of arguing will change it.

I've played more than 5 hours on the 360, in Halo ODST alone.

I'd say that the games worth getting on the PS3 are more like 90% "mature" (like you said, not M, just made for "mature" audiences; in other words including some T games). The games worth owning on the Wii are probably around 85-90% E-T, leaning towards E, but that doesn't equate to them being games for children. The E rating in no way means that the games are specifically aimed at children. Nor does it mean the games are shallow, easy, or boring. Maybe you think differently, but I would never say Mario, Donkey Kong, Sonic, Punch Out!, or Zelda (all E-E10) appeal only to kids. In the same way, the M rating doesn't necessarily mean the game targets only adults. It only means the ESRB doesn't find the game kid-friendly. Plenty of kids play M games. You yourself said you were playing M games when you were 8! How do you define between games for kids and adults, when both kids and adults play and enjoy just about every major game? Whenever someone proposes a law to ban kids from playing M games, do you know who protests the loudest? The M game developers/publishers. If such a law passed they would lose millions because that's how many kids play their M games.

Also, since the PS3's library of good games is mostly made up of M games, what does it have to offer someone who likes E-T games like me? You complain that the Wii has too few M games, but at the same time the PS3 and 360 have too few E games. What are some great E games on the HD systems? LBP, Modnation, Banjo Kazooie, Ratchet and Clank, and what else? There are more great M games on the Wii than great E games on both HD systems combined.

Nintendoftw

#359

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Processing speed isn't all that matters. Look at the discussion.

@TrueWiiMaster The only reason there are more E rated games on the Wii is because the Wii has more games...... In order to have an M rating, the game usually has red blood in it. If there were certain parts in Metroid Prime were you could kill humans then it would have an M rating.... Games like Battlefield only have an M rating because there is blood. GTA IV on the other hand has drugs, sex, blood, and guns... M rating is justified, but still there is no doubt most games that are rated M on the PS3/360 are only marked that way because there is blood.

And you don't like Red Dead Redemption just because it's too "violent" to you? ROFL. I mean there was one part in the game that might be a bit graphic and if more of the game were like it I would totally say it's all justified, but the worst thing you'd find in the game is that you can shoot people and blood comes out, and the fact that there is a bit of cursing. The Wii has no variety, because nearly the majority of the library are childish games... And the majority of the PS3/360 library aren't mature rated games, just the majority of games that are considered good. The PS3/360 I admit the majority of good games are M/T rated, but to be honest all of the E rated games still exceed the average Wii game, even if they have a bad review... Say a game like Epic Mickey... Looks great doesn't it? If it were ported to the PS3/360 without any improvements then the game would probably get a 6.5/10.... Different story on the Wii because the expectations are higher on the 360/PS3...

Tell me, do you expect an average Wii game to have ragdoll physics? Well that's what's expected on PS3/360 titles. Do you expect Wii game to have graphics AT LEAST as good as GTA IV? That's what's expected on the average PS3/360 game. Expectations on the Wii are as low as the expectations were for the gamecube/xbox.

Oh and theres nothing wrong with liking E/T rated games, but when you say you can't take a game just because there is blood in it makes you sound... I love my Nintendo exclusives but it sounds to me like all you play IS Nintendo exclusives...

Quake

#360

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Again, the percentage you are using is not backed up by math so it has no weight in this conversation. But either way that is still your opinion whether or not it's pathetic for the Wii not to have enough "mature" titles but is not pathetic for the PS3 to have a good amount of "mature" titles. (That comes down to be a double-standard, though.)

Saying that Batman AC is hard only when one "fully" completes it doesn't hold any water. Any game that has optional collect-a-thon side quests would then become hard. Based off of that logic a game such as Donkey Kong Returns (which is not a "mature" game according to all that you've said) is automatically hard only because you have optional collect-a-thon side quests that are required to "fully" beat the game. When in actuality, whether or not you attempt the collect-a-thon side quests the game still requires skill to complete.

You are judging the graphics chip's abilities based off of one game that has amazing fog effects? And based on a game that came out less than one year since the launch of the system? (RE: R) That's jumping to conclusions without enough data to sit on either side.

TrueWiiMaster

#362

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Wrong. Very Wrong. Count up just the top 50 games on each system. Are you telling me that the PS3 and 360 would have anywhere near as many E games in that list as the Wii? It has nothing to do with sheer numbers.

Ah, I see what you're saying by "the majority of the PS3/360 library aren't mature rated games, just the majority of games that are considered good". The PS3 and 360 have games rated lower than M (pretty sure most of those are T) but they're generally not good. The Wii has many excellent games rated E-T, and a handful of excellent M games. The HD systems have many great M games, some great T games, and about 3 or 4 decent E games. Did I misinterpret that?

What you said about mediocre E games on the HD systems being better than most great E games on the Wii is seriously flawed. Epic Mickey, though it had a less-than-perfect camera, was a great game that used a unique concept and and engrossing world to pull the player in. If it were ported to the HD systems without any changes, then yes, it would get a lower score, but not because it was worse than other E games on the HD systems. The point loss would stem exclusively from the graphical difference between it and other games on its new platform. Given a new coat of paint (pun intended), it might score higher than the Wii version, not because the graphics actually made it better, but because it would suddenly be one of the best E games on the PS3 and 360 (it has much more competition for that title on the Wii).

Did you read my post earlier? I said it wasn't the violence in Red Dead that kept me from wanting it. Look at the ESRB box. There's more than drinking, language, and violence in it. In fact, your last post makes me wonder if you've read ANY of my posts. How many times have I said I played Halo, COD, and Unreal Tournament? Those are all rated M. It's not that I hate all M games, nor is it that I can't stand a little cussing and blood in games I play (though there are many games I would avoid because they are just plain excessive), but none of that is my preference. Enjoying games with such content specifically for that content is more immature than mature.

I've grown up at least as much as an 8 year old who played M games and still plays M games. You see, when I was 8 I was playing E games, and I still enjoy them today (not exclusively, but I'm not ashamed to say they're the majority of my library). When you were 8 you were playing M games, and you still enjoy them today. What's the difference? Or should I take the advice of thousands of teenagers (and I'm not talking 16 year olds) playing M games online on Xbox who would say the exact same thing you're saying? "Grow up! Only kids play Nintendo!"

P.S.- Like I said earlier, I play what I enjoy. You play what you enjoy. I'm not attacking your love of M games, so please refrain from attacking my love of non-M games. There is absolutely no objective way to say a game with either rating is better for adults to play.

Nintendoftw

#363

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I don't care about the rating of the game, I grew up primarily playing E rated games, but some of the games I played were rated M (Conkers Bad Fur Day, GTA III, etc). I grew up mostly with my N64 and my Xbox. I had all three systems of last gen and enjoyed them all equally and still think the PS2 was way overrated. It's not that I think rated E games are kiddie games at all. It's just that games like Epic Mickey mostly appeal to kids, even though E stands for Everyone. The only reason your preference would be toward E rated games is because you don't play a lot of M rated games, and it's understandable because you don't have an HD system... Stop bringing up Nintendo exclusives, I am not talking about those btw.

If Epic Mickey was ported to the PS3/360 with updated graphics then it would score a 7/10.... The reason is because quite frankly, compared to the good PS3/360 games Epic Mickey is garbage. Nintendo is the only developer who makes it possible for last gen hardware to have games that match up and destroy PS3/360 games. Games like Super Smash Bros Brawl and Super Mario Galaxy are some of the ONLY games a sony/microsoft fan would want.... Why is that? Third party developers on the Wii are the worst of this gen, without a doubt.

Quake

#364

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Ragdoll physics have been in use far before the HD generation. (They started in the late 90's) CoD doesn't even use ragdoll physics, they only have pre-rendered death animations and it is one of the best-selling franchises in the HD generation. So the expectations a consumer has for a PS3/360 game are not as high as you perceive them to be.

Nintendoftw

#365

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake NO.. Dude the 3DS graphics chip's specialty is fog effects, look up the 3DS on wiki, click on it's graphics chip... That's widely known.

And Donkey Kong games are challenging. Bad example. Being mature has nothing to do with being hardcore.

TrueWiiMaster

#367

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Ummm, you brought up Nintendo exclusives. I wasn't the one who brought Epic Mickey into this. That would be you.

Epic Mickey appeals to kids... and platformer fans...and Mickey fans (who span generations btw)... and people interested in a somewhat dark, consequence-heavy game unlike any before it. That's more than just kids.

"The only reason your preference would be toward E rated games is because you don't play a lot of M rated games." Are you seriously implying that M games are overall better than E-T games? Because that's not objective, realistic, or accurate.
"...and it's understandable because you don't have an HD system." I own a PS2 and Gamecube, and I have for quite a while. Are you saying that their M games don't count? Don't fool yourself. I've had access to M games for years, but I still prefer non-M games. Like I said, I do play them sometimes. They're not new to me.

And you've played Epic Mickey and find it to be terrible? And I'm not talking about a store demo either. I wouldn't say Ratchet and Clank, LBP, or Modnation are any better. Actually, I'd say LBP and Modnation are worse...

If the Sony/Microsoft fan was actually a gamer, they'd want plenty more than those two games on the Wii. As I've said, there are many excellent games on the Wii that have no counterpart on the HD systems, and they're not just 1st party games.

Because I don't want to fill my free time with blood baths, sexual themes, and heavy cussing, I "sound like an old women"? I mean, that must be what you meant, right? I play COD and Halo, so clearly the less offensive M games aren't what I don't like. I never knew every elderly woman, and no one else, was disgusted by blood fountains, crushing skulls with your foot, and sentences made up mostly of words that can't be aired on the radio being used as entertainment! What is this, the coliseum? I don't find gore and cussing entertaining, and that somehow makes me an "old women" (nice spelling btw)?

Quake

#368

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Again, Wiki is not an accurate source of information just because anyone can alter it. But regardless of that, I read the article and could not locate any sentence that says the chip is more proficient at creating fog effects over other effects. So I need you to copy and paste the part of the Wiki that verifies your claim.

Even if my point doesn't satisfy what you perceive to be correct, you still said that a game is only difficult when it has a lot of side quests, and if you don't play the side quests the game is no longer difficult. If collect-a-thon games are hardcore then DK64 must be in the top ten most hardcore games simply because you have the option to collect, a lot. But if someone decides not to collect the side items then the game is no longer hardcore to the one who decided against the collecting.

Nintendoftw

#369

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster No, I never said because you don't like gore... Gore and blood are completely different. God Of War 3 and Dante's Inferno are gore. GTA IV has no gore, just blood mostly...

I've seen REAL gore and I can tell you just so you can know, video game gore is just about as scarring as My Little Pony.... Comparing real gore an game gore is like comparing a nerf launcher to a rocket launcher.. Trust me.

Nintendoftw

#370

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Wrong... A hardcore gamer would collect the collectibles... If the game appeals to a hardcore gamer who enjoys a challenge then it is considered hardcore. I know a hardcore gamer could also enjoy easy games too, but i'm talking about hardcore games that hardcore gamers flock to in the masses.

And having collectibles doesn't means that it's a hardcore game, being challenging makes it a hardcore game. Super Smash Bros, Sin and Punishment, Portal 2, and Dead Space 2 are challenging, so they are all hardcore games... But in reality it depends completely on the gamer and how good you are at video games. I can assure you that Dead Space 2 on the hardest difficulty is almost as "hardcore" as you can get. Not up there with sin and punishment but it's not easy by a long shot.

I also speak of games that take skill... So in this aspect Call Of Duty (Rather it be a mindless shot em up or not) is hardcore. Battlefield 3 is hardcore. Super Smash Bros is hardcore. GTA IV is arguably hardcore... Soul Calibur IV is hardcore. All of these and the lot of the PS3/360's library is hardcore.

Quake

#371

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw So you're contradicting yourself. In post #362, from what I can surmise from the post, kinda choppy. You said that Batman: AC is, in the context of the post, a hardcore game based solely on the fact it is difficult to beat the game"fully" regardless of the difficulty level. I do agree with you, however, that the difficulty of a game is relative to the player.

I can't comment on whether or not Dead Space 2 is hard on hard, but from what I played of it, it was pretty easy, just minor differences from what RE4 started on the Cube. RE4 on the Cube wasn't that hard either, regardless of the difficulty.

CoD does take skill, but I'm not sure whether you would count camping and other cheap methods as a skill. (they don't require skill.)

Most fighting games hardcore just by the nature of their design. I don't wanna even get started with BF3 again, because it's quite apparent we had/have different experiences with the game. Never played a GTA, Just Cause 2 shares the closest similarities, though not completely comparable, and I own that. If you're gonna ask why I haven't played GTA it boils down to this, I don't like the option/ability/requirement to kill Police. That is also part of the reason why I traded BF3 today, that mission where you MUST kill Police in order to get to your objective. (I'm lacking specifics to prevent possible spoilers for any current/future board readers.) In general, don't wanna debate why I don't want to kill the Police, and I don't care if that comes across as illegitimate answer. Not that I'm specifically saying you would call me out on this, just trying to cover all my bases.

TrueWiiMaster

#372

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
And I never said I can't stand a little blood. GTA doesn't have much gore as far as I know, but it does have sexual themes and offensive content that give me reason to avoid it. Which is exactly what I said: "...I don't want to fill my free time with blood baths, sexual themes, and heavy cussing..." And I don't stay away from gore for fear of being traumatized. I avoid it because I don't like it, simple as that. Other than gore, there are elements in some games, like the ones I mentioned in GTA, that I'd rather not support or play, based on my own personal morals. Those morals won't be influenced by you telling me to grow up and play the games anyway, so you might as well give up on that.

Wait, so a game is hardcore if hardcore gamers like it? Huh. The Wii has more hardcore games than even I thought!

I still have doubts about Portal 2 being hardcore. I'm not saying it's not great, nor that it's easy, but if it's anything like Portal 1 you get all the time in the world to figure out some, admittedly sometimes mind-bending, puzzles. It may be hard, but so is a sudoku or crossword collection.

All games require some amount of skill. What makes a game hardcore is requiring a LOT of skill. Skill obtained through practice. I could beat the campaign mode of Battlefield or COD without much practice, and probably without being all that good, and in an online match skill is optional. I doubt GTA IV is that hard, because if it was, you wouldn't have said "arguably". Soul Caliber is a game that once again gives you the option to practice or not; skill's not necessary. Smash Bros is unique from other fighters in that it offers more than a simple multiplayer game with a tournament-style one player mode. Trying to unlock every trophy is VERY hard, and requires hours of practice.

Before you say anything, I know that practice can make you better at any of those games, as it can at just about any game ever, but it's optional! People who put hundreds of hours into COD are hardcore, but they aren't necessarily hardcore gamers. They're hardcore COD fans. There are plenty of hardcore fighter fans, but few fighters actually require hardcore dedication. It's an option, but so is just going so far as learning the moves and then never getting any better. Hardcore gamers can be hardcore fans, but not all hardcore fans are hardcore gamers.

DKCR, Sin and Punishment, Excitebots, Punch Out!, and Monster Hunter all require practice to BEAT the games, and require even more skill to beat them completely (i.e. collect everything, play on harder difficulty, etc.).

Nintendoftw

#374

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake So you do not want to kill police officers.... In a video game... I suppose it's reasonable if you have a family member that died in the police force but, c'mon.. -_-. Killing people in general is bad. Killing ANYTHING is bad. And if your going to not play a game because of that, well you might as well stick to puzzle games.

Nintendoftw

#375

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster All of the games you said required practice aren't hard at all with the exception of Sin and Punishment... Portal is hard, DO NOT compare it to a Sudoku... It is nothing like that and the type of thinking you're doing is completely different. GTA IV is challenging, although I said "arguably". You try lasting 10 minutes with a 6 star wanted level you tell me that "Excitebots" is harder. I'm still laughing at the fact that you listed excitebots... I mean i'd understand mario kart but... Excitebots...? Lol.

And plus video games don't ruin your "morals"... I without a doubt have better morals than most people I know, and I played Conkers Bad Fur Day at the age of five (look the game up). The problem with morals is that you don't know rather they are good or not until you test them on especially complex situations. But back on subject, playing video games aren't supposed to oppose your morals... I mean I WILL ADMIT that when I play God Of War and Kratos kills a civilian I kind of grimace, but I don't put down the game entirely... In GTA IV there isn't a lot of sex at all, the only sexual part in it is the fact that you can go to the red light district and pick up a hooker (This is completely optional, just like killing civilians is...). And it is understandable that you may not like GTA IV, I mean the story revolves around some eastern European guy trying to make it big and having to kill to get it. But Red Dead Redemption's story is pretty much the same as a western movie with the same amount of violence encountered in said movie... You really find western movies too vile to watch...?

SanFrisco9er

#377

SanFrisco9er said:

@TrueWiiMaster Cough! Did you hear that one? If you didn't make sure you plug in your ears in the computer like last time.

@Quake Gears of War 1's box said ONLY FOR XBOX(anything XBOX:OG/360 exclusive HAS to be on pc) & do you hate GoW you could've played IDK(name well known game without a glitch) kick the can & for the online stop being a sore loser it was like most played on XBOXLIVE for quite some time. Oh yeah I liked the Campaign too, I think that's why there was a trilogy. You must be looking for something to argue about but GoW is not the topic to be arguing about. Everything after the first sentence you typed wasn't necessary, trying to deny why GoW is a great 360 exclusive is like trying to deny why MKDS was the best racing game on the ds despite all the online problems.

TrueWiiMaster

#378

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Like I said, I have my standards, and you won't change them. Maybe your morals say it's wrong to kill civilians in real life, but okay to do it for entertainment in the virtual world, but not mine. Like Quake, I'm also against games that require you to kill cops, nor do I want to support games in which "you can go to the red light district and pick up a hooker". It's my choice. Please actually read what I said about Red Dead. I've said at least 3 times that it's not the violence that I have a problem with in that game. I might consider getting it some day (if the content I don't want is optional), because it does look awesome, but I thought that long before I began talking with you.

The fact you played Conker at age 5 is more sad than impressive (N64 version, right? The Xbox version was cut). I don't need to look it up. That game, though excellently made by one of the best developers at the time, is infamous for being one of the dirtiest games ever made. And that grimace you get when killing civilians in God of War? Over time it will get jaded, and you won't even notice killing innocents in games. It's called getting desensitized.

Mario Kart Wii is the easiest Mario Kart to date. Double Dash was HARD. It's console sequel, not so much. And am I to assume you've played Excitebots, DKCR, and Punch Out to prove they're not hard? You already said you've never played Monster Hunter, so you're no more qualified to say anything about it than I am about games I've never played. All these games will require practice to beat, especially if you go the extra mile and beat them 100%. If you think it's hard to "try lasting 10 minutes with a 6 star wanted level", then try beating the hardest level, or any level, in Excitebots in "Super Excite" mode. Winning requires a practically perfect run, which requires having played the course many times until you have it memorized and have the best routes planned out, plus hitting every opportunity for a trick or bonus. Plus, isn't getting a 6 star wanted level something you generally try to AVOID doing in GTA?

As for Portal, let me put it another way. In the games I mentioned, skill is the most important part of beating the games. Even if you were to look online for help, they would still be hard. Can you say that for Portal? If Portal 2 is anything like the first game, it gives you puzzles and you have to find the answers. If you know the answer, the difficulty disappears or at least lessens. I'm not saying the answers are easy to come by, but it's more of a mental challenge than something you practice to get better at.

TrueWiiMaster

#379

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
I try not to plug my ears into the computer. Bad habit to start.

Let's see, famous games without glitches... Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, New Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Super Smash Bros, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Punch Out, and Monster Hunter. Of course, saying to "name well known game without a glitch" understates the problems with Gears of War. It had far more than 1 glitch.

Also, not every Xbox/360 exclusive is on the PC. Do some research!

Nintendoftw

#380

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I do agree Portal can be taken care of with walkthroughs but hardcore gamers usually don't need walkthroughs. And really all that Wii games do when you increase difficulty is make you take more damage.... On PS3/360 usually the AI becomes smarter, your health goes down quicker, AND more enemies are on the screen. The Wii can't even run good AI and plenty of enemies on screen... The only game to showcase insane amounts of somewhat intelligent AI on screen was The Grinder, and i'm sure that's cancelled lol. GTA IV requires skill in driving and accuracy with shoot (If you're not a noob and play without lock on on). But mostly the driving part of GTA IV is a lot more of a challenge than driving in excite bots.... How can I say this without even had playing he game? Well GTA IV's driving is one word: Realistic.

Nintendoftw

#381

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Lol Super Maro Galaxy did have glitches. All of those games do, but of course none are as widely known as GoW's glitches. I loved Super Mario Galaxy, I just wish they would acknowledge and remake Super Mario Sunshine on the 3DS/ Wii U.

Nintendoftw

#382

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster No Kratos killing a civilian was part of the storyline. I can kill civilians in GTA IV all I want, because it isn't part of the storyline. Feels different.

And even if I kill civilians in video games without feeling bad, why is it supposed to make me feel bad...? They don't have lives, and they are all programmed through a computer... Would you feel bad about destroying a computer?

Quake

#383

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Did you read that article? All that it says is that the 3DS comes with fog effects built on a chip in the system. Nowhere does it say whether or not the system is more proficient at creating fog effects over other effects. Plus, it's not from Wiki like you claimed it would be.

Like I said before, I don't care if you believe my reason to be illegitimate. There's not room for it's discussion. It comes down to personal beliefs, and nothing you say can change my opinion on the subject.

TrueWiiMaster

#384

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Yes, hardcore gamers don't usually need/use walkthroughs (unless we're talking collect-a-thon games) but in a hardcore GAME a walkthrough wouldn't really make the game easier, as seen in Monster Hunter and Excitebots. And like I said, changing the difficulty setting doesn't make a game hardcore, but when you increase the difficulty in Wii games you usually have less health, take more damage, and or are faced with more/smarter enemies, same as games on the HD systems. Of course, none of that applies to any of the games I mentioned anyway. None of them rely on difficulty settings to be hard.

Again, all games require some amount of skill. That doesn't make the game hardcore. Hardcore games require a LOT of skill. Needing "skill in driving and accuracy with shoot" is not a lot of skill. Having realistic driving doesn't make GTA harder than anything else either. Last I checked, there were quite a few people who could drive.

"How can I say this without even had playing he game?" You can't. At least, not with any authority whatsoever. Excitebots is hard. Many games feature realistic driving, and many people drive realistically, but no game drives like Excitebots. It requires fast reactions, knowledge of the tracks, and practice. Lots of practice. Does GTA need practice to beat the game?

Please enlighten me as to what the glitches are in those games. I've played all of them and found none.

I never said you should feel bad about killing civilians in games. I said, and I quote, "Maybe your morals say it's wrong to kill civilians in real life, but okay to do it for entertainment in the virtual world, but not mine." I don't want to do it, but feel free to become a virtual serial killer if that's what you want.

BTW, I would love to see Mario Sunshine 2 on the Wii U or 3DS. The first was awesome, and it always annoys me when Nintendo acts like it never existed. That game was hard.

Quake

#385

Quake said:

@SanFrisco9er Wow, umm, that comment really holds no water at all. By what you're saying that would mean that Halo 3, an exclusive to the 360 because it says so on the box, would also be on the PC, but it's not. That also goes for all the other 360 Halo games. Nor are Gears 2 or 3 on the PC. And if Gears is not the topic to be debating then why did you bring it up and use it as a point in the debate?

Nintendoftw

#386

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Lol Excitebots is harder than mario kart btw? ROFL... One game is only need to dismiss this statement: Mario Kart 7.

ANd of course you've never played GTA IV if you say the driving doesn't mean anything... You do know the entire game revolves around driving, right? Tell me, if driving isn't what makes a game like that hard then you get on multiplayer and try to dodge missiles from players in helicopters and multiple other cars chasing you while shooting at yours tires and through your windows... You will find it to be quite difficult without good driving skills (It's like one of the most essential things in the game, you do more driving than walking.)

If a game is hard, then it should be considered hardcore... Rather it takes upping the difficulty settings or not. And Wii games have some of the most terrible AI I have seen in gaming... Wii AI is almost comparable to some of the game I have on my DS's AI. The only thing they do is give you less health and maybe add a few more enemies in place of better AI... And since the Wii can't handle a lot of enemies on screen, the Wii fails at even giving you plenty of enemies.

TrueWiiMaster

#387

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I've beaten every cup in Mario Kart 7 except for those in Mirror mode, and so far Excitebots is definitely the harder of the two. That aside, all I said before was that Excitebots was harder than Mario Kart Wii. I specifically said Double Dash was very difficult.

When did I say the driving in GTA wasn't important? I said that it having realistic driving does not automatically make it harder than any other game. The game might be impossible without decent driving skills but "all games require some amount of skill". Mario Bros would be impossible without the ability to use well-timed jumps. Halo would be impossible without the ability to aim your reticle accurately. But basic skills like jumping, aiming, and driving aren't what make a game hardcore! It's the advanced portions that are much harder to master.

As I said before, the difficulty setting debate doesn't even apply to most hardcore Wii games, as they're already hard, unlike most of the games on the HD systems. I can only assume the games you're referring to on the Wii with bad AI are a few of the FPS games, which are in no way representative of Wii games in general. In my experience, shifting from normal to hard mode increases the enemy count, lowers your health, lowers your defense, and/or makes the enemies stronger.

Either way, which is more hardcore, a game that's hard, or a game that must be switched to hard? A game that takes significant skill, or a game that leaves it up to the player whether they should need skill or not? A game whose very essence is to be challenging, or a game that's not that hard, but on hard mode strengthens the enemies and weakens the player, while keeping the same not-that-hard core intact?

Quake

#388

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw AI is the developers job, not just based solely on the systems capabilities. Thinking with the restrictions that you have set, the Wii's capabilities being slightly lower than the original Xbox, how on earth is the Wii's AI even remotely comparable to the DS's AI? The only possible reason would be that the developers are not doing their job well enough. That is paradoxical reasoning on your part.

Nintendoftw

#389

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Have to say that is a pretty good argument. A game that is meant to be hard of course is hardcore. The PS3 has it's fair share of hardcore games in that case... I might have underestimated the amount of hardcore games on the Wii in this case, as the Wii has quite a few puzzle games and others that you would say give you a challenge... But PS3/360 games have their challenges too, check out PSN Store, plenty of puzzle games and games meant to be difficult there. I was also using Metroid Prime 3 as a prime example of bad AI. MP3's AI is usually what the average Wii game's AI usually is... But if you were to play a PS3 game you would notice enemies have the ability to pick up your grenades and throw them back at you, they take cover and don't just stand a shoot, etc.

And I also wanted to bring in the online part of the two consoles... This is a HUGE HUGE HUGE factor in modern day gaming, and will definitely be even bigger in the next generation of consoles. The DS's online play was at least comparable to the PSP's online play... But the Wii's online play is beat by even the PSP... And that is simply not acceptable. Wouldn't you agree that if Nintendo were not to get in sync with online capabilities next gen, the Wii U will be at a huge risk of flopping? Considering that the majority of Wii sales went to casual gamers and casual gamers all now have Wii systems already or if not a Wii system an xbox 360 with kinect that if Nintendo uses the same technique as last gen the Wii U will fail? Think about it... Casual gamers already have a casual system, why buy another? They most definitely will not know the Wii U is the successor... The ONLY sales Nintendo will get next gen is off of the true gamers... And please do not say a lot of true gamers bought the Wii, because it is widely known that the Wii is known as a "casual system".

Nintendoftw

#390

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Indeed that is the developer's fault, but the developers are who makes the games right? We all know Wii developers are usually lazy, making games like My Horsez and My Hamster..... So if most Wii exclusive developers are lazy and most of the HD system's developers spend years on their games, wouldn't that make HD system games more polished? (I don't even know why I had to explain that because we all know that HD console games are more polished...)

Quake

#391

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw The "My (something)" series is purely made by Ubi, saw a large advertisement for them in an old Gamestop holiday catalog and a large Ubi logo in the corner. Though I've yet to see an Ubi game come out that didn't have its fair share of glitches. And Ubi is not a Wii exclusive developer.

I can't recall any Wii exclusive developer that has a game with many, if any, glitches. On the other hand I've yet to see very many HD system games come out without a large number of glitches, and they do generally take around 2-3 years to create the game. If a game comes out and has numerous glitches, popping textures, bugs and online lag it's quite obvious the developer(s) did not polish the game, and that is what the HD systems are primarily comprised of, games that are tested by the consumers who spent $60 on a beta. I don't think I've played a game on the HD generation that didn't update when I first put the disc in. I think that I only enjoyed Bad Company 2 to the degree I did because I got it over a year after it had been tested by everyone else, and I got it for less than they did.

TrueWiiMaster

#392

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
There are certainly plenty of hardcore games on the Wii that aren't puzzlers, the ones I've been mentioning for example.

The Wii may be known as the "casual" system, but that moniker was given to it by HD system fans. I seriously doubt the majority of Wiis sold were sold to people who were actually casual gamers as defined by the modern definition. Plenty were, but I don't think they were the majority. Many HD system owners, even if they only own one of the HD systems, also own, or have owned, a Wii. And of course, there are also plenty of gamers who bought and enjoyed Wiis, such as myself.

All the Wii U would need to grab those same casual gamers you say it will surely miss would be some kindle support, the ability to watch something on the remote and TV, and a killer new game like Wii Sports. They will not avoid the Wii U when they see features like these, even if they already own a Wii and don't fully understand the difference.

I can't say much about the Wii's online. I've never had problems in any of the games I played online. I'll admit that there are far fewer online games on the Wii, and that better/more voice chat would be nice, but from my experience I can't say the service is bad. That said, Nintendo does need to step up their online play if they want to reach the PS3 and 360 fans who so adore it. Of course, just getting the 3rd party games that have been out of reach of the Wii will instantly boost the Wii U's online. Games like Battlefield and COD, though not announced, are almost certain.

I think you're using that old, flawed definition of "true gamers" again. I would consider myself a gamer, and I'll buy the Wii U whether it's super powerful or not.

HD games have more polish? Compare the polish on AAA HD games to AAA Wii games. The HD games often have updates soon after launch and continue to have updates long after. The Wii games don't have updates (I know this is because the Wii doesn't do updates) and yet still have fewer issues than most HD games after the final update has been released. Look at all the glitches found in Gears of War and Skyrim!

This reminds me... what were those Mario Galaxy and Monster Hunter glitches you mentioned earlier?

SanFrisco9er

#393

SanFrisco9er said:

@TrueWiiMaster Now name non-nintendo-related-games without glitches.

@Quake All I said was that game was mindblowing when I FIRST played it. What are you trying to prove?

@TrueWiiMaster&@QUAKE (anything XBOX:OG/360 exclusive HAS to be on pc) I never said anything XBOX:OG/360 exclusive is on pc.

@TrueWiiMaster Learn how to read & Get off my LEVEL! You're an elderly women? YOU MUST BE 24.

Quake

#394

Quake said:

@SanFrisco9er The only thing that is dis-proven is that Gears 1 is not a 360 exclusive. Off of the second post the thing I dis-proved is that just because the box says it's an exclusive doesn't necessarily mean it's an exclusive anymore.

In the end mentioning Gears 1 in the context you did had no relevance to the discussion in general.

So it must be your personal preference to want anything that's an Original Xbox or 360 game to be on the PC as well?

TrueWiiMaster

#395

TrueWiiMaster said:

@SanFrisco9er
Monster Hunter's not made by Nintendo. If you meant trying to find games not on Nintendo platforms that are glitch-free, that's pretty hard. Few company's put as much polish into their games as Nintendo and the companies making Nintendo exclusives.

You said, and I quote, "anything XBOX:OG/360 exclusive HAS to be on pc". In other words, any Xbox OG/360 exclusive HAS to be on PC. You said it, not me.

What are you even talking about? Are you still on that age thing?

Nintendoftw

#396

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Rofl wrong. Wii games tend to have TONS more glitches than any HD console game... Especially since Wii games don't receive patch updates... I encountered a problem with Bully: Scholarship edition where the gate was closed so I couldn't go on to the next mission... And NO wii games never ever take years to develop unless they are made y top notch developers like Nintendo...

TrueWiiMaster

#397

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
And do all HD games take years to develop? Many meet the bare minimum to use the word "years", as in 2 year development, and many use less than 2 years. Gears, COD, Assassin's Creed, Halo, and Uncharted all took 2 years or less to develop each sequel (I don't know how long it took to make the first games in these series, but every sequel came out about 2 years or less after the previous entry). And that's counting Modern Warfare separate from Black Ops. There was less than a year between Halo ODST and Halo Reach for crying out loud! If the some of the biggest titles on the HD systems get development times of 2 years or less, how can you accuse the majority of Wii games of having not enough time in development?

Of course the shovelware games on the Wii have plenty of glitches (that's half of what makes them shovelware!), and I've already admitted the Wii has a lot of shovelware (btw I'm not calling Bully shovelware; just saying that shovelware's where the "TONS more glitches" are). That doesn't have any effect on how many great games it has. The best games on the Wii generally have few to no glitches, while the best games on the HD systems tend to have several to dozens of glitches when released. They may get updated (though that doesn't always fix EVERY glitch), but you were talking about longer development time and polish before release, not fixing a broken game after selling it.

What do you mean by "top-notch" developers anyway? Of course that includes Nintendo, but does that cover Capcom, Activision, Ubisoft, and EA? I mean, Activision and Ubisoft have become pretty infamous for releasing games almost annually not just on the Wii, but also on the HD systems...

And I'm still waiting for those Monster Hunter and Mario Galaxy glitches.

Quake

#398

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw You do realize that Bully was originally on the PS2 and later ported to the Wii, which would mean it's not a Wii exclusive, which means it has no relevance in this conversation. It's also worth noting how you mentioned in an earlier comment that Rockstar wouldn't bother with the Wii, but quite obviously they do have games on the Wii, Bully SE and Manhunt 2. By the way, Bully SE was also on the 360 as well and the 360 version has WAY more glitches than the Wii version. In this situation the Wii version ends up being the best version to buy because it doesn't have as many glitches, the 360 version was patched, but that just mainly fixed the game freezing portions.

Nintendoftw

#399

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Monster Hunter Tri: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_3FxjCwQWM
(Not counting many many others I saw)

Super Mario Galaxy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMoODFlJvaE&feature=related

ALL games have glitches, and of course HD console games are A LOT more polished than any game on the Wii. And exactly, the fact that a lot of good PS3 exclusives take 2 years at the last to develop means that they have plenty of polish... Wii games are pretty much last gen, why do you think it has so many games? Developers always say Wii is the easiest system to develop games for...

Nintendoftw

#400

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake No... The 360 version of Bully was better than the Wii version in every way possible. The Wii version was pretty much the PS2 version with added missions... While the 360 version had added local multiplayer, better graphics, and all the missions the Wii version had... Along with better controls.

Nintendoftw

#402

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Of course the online part doesn't bother you much... I think the only reason it doesn't is because you haven't experienced how much online play does for a game system. The Wii's online play is inferior to a handheld's online play, which is just hilarious.

Nintendoftw

#405

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake All of that was because it was running on the old Xbox 360, and it was known for crashing and graphical glitches... Compare a game like Monster Hunter and LA Noire and see how the glitches pair up... You will find LA Noire to be the superior.

Quake

#406

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Not to mention the so-called coop is just splitscreen mini games.

Wow, first video of glitches I find for L.A. Noire and it shows how buggy the game is. If I can't even walk or drive around without falling through the map or the game freezing how can I even play the game? Not to mention the popping environment. And that game took 7 years to make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMfo1YBmCn0

Nintendoftw

#407

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake This shows that ALL games have glitches... And plus glitches like those are rare to find, as they aren't in the review... That game is more detailed than any Wii game ever made...

TrueWiiMaster

#408

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
That Monster Hunter glitch was interesting, but the Mario Galaxy glitch was kind of useless. Yes, it was a glitch, but you pretty much had to try to get it. The glitches I was talking about are the ones that happen on their own while you're playing the game, like those frequently found in HD games. So you've proved that Mario Galaxy and Monster Hunter have glitches. Even with a couple, however, they still have more polish than most HD games, which, as I said, can have DOZENS of glitches.

Since you seem to be targeting it now, I'll also say that Monster Hunter isn't very glitchy. Evidently it has the glitch you showed, but it has few others, and even fewer that actually affect gameplay.

I think you misread my post. I said those games, all some of the biggest HD games out there, all took about 2 years or LESS. Halo Reach, the latest entry in what many would call the 360's biggest exclusive franchise, came out less than a year after ODST. There were less than 2 years between Uncharted 1 and 2, and just over two years between 2 and 3. Gears had exactly 2 years between its 1st and second installments and spent about 2.7 years on the 3rd, with a significant delay. It's not that the HD games take at least 2 years so much as UP TO 2 years. And guess what! Wii games often take about that long, unless you're talking about the irrelevant shovelware again. Of course, some Wii games take much longer, just like some HD games take much longer. No console has specifically the longest development times for its games. Gran Turismo may have been in production for 5 years, but Skyward Sword took almost 5 years too.

I've played 2 of the biggest online franchises and I've never experienced online play? I know what it is and how much value it can have. Of course, I also know how detrimental it can be to the games that contain it, but that's another story. If you truly think the Wii's online play is so awful, you need to play Monster Hunter more than ever. Many consider it the best online Wii game to date, and it wouldn't be a stretch to say it's one of the best online games of this generation. And just because it lacks a gun doesn't reduce its chances...

Wii Music sold just over 2.5 million, and Wii Sports Resort sold over 27 million. But here are the problems with your logic. First, Wii Sports Resort appeals to more than just casual gamers. Anyone who ever wanted to really swing a virtual sword wanted it. People of all categories wanted to try the new 1:1 technology, and I'm sure just bundling the Motion Plus attachment sold more than a few copies. Just because it used motion control didn't make it a purely casual game. It appealed to everyone. Second, the 2nd best-selling Wii game (after the pack-in Wii Sports) was Mario Kart Wii at almost 32 million copies sold, and I doubt even you would say those were all casual gamers. In March 2010, more than 2 years ago, almost 10 million copies of Brawl had been sold. That's almost 4 times the number of Wii Music sales. The sales of a couple games aren't representative of all, or most, Wii owners.

BTW, the Kinect has sold millions of games just as casual as Wii Music. Is it also a casual system?

Quake

#409

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I'd still say that Skyward Sword is more detailed than L.A. Noire. But I suppose that also comes down to preference in a game. Realistic versus fantasy. Generally I would rather play a game that's fake over one that's possibly just another persons altered reality. If I want/wanted to be a detective I could/could have been one and it would be much more realistic than L.A. Noire because it's reality. But it's impossible to fight giant beasts/goombas/ogres/etc. in reality because they don't exist. Simple as that.

All games may have glitches but HD games have far more than the Wii. As far as I can tell you have to go looking for glitches on Wii games while on HD games the glitches generally find you. Like in that Galaxy 2 video, you must specifically point the cannon at a part of the screen and fire to get it to work while just from playing BF3's campaign I was knifed through a door by the computer just from taking cover behind a counter in a garage. And in another glitch a tank was still moving after it had been destroyed, the tank one was on 1.04.

I would say that most reviewers omit quite a few of the technical glitches in games simply because most are so obvious that it seems like it's impossible to not notice them. Gears 2 for example, that game had SO many glitches at launch and yet no reviewers ever mentioned them. Whether it was lag, using a two handed weapon while holding a shield, infinite ammo or invisibility, no reviewer ever mentioned any technical issues.

Quake

#410

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Bully SE was ported to the fat 360, they should have compensated for any possible problems. Also, why would playing it on the slim 360 be better than the fat?

Nintendoftw

#411

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Halo Reach has been in development well before Halo ODST -_-. THINK. Uncharted 2 was in development alongside Uncharted. COD Black Ops was in development alongside COD MW2. Most sequels that come out annually were already in development when their prequels were being developed. That has NOTHING to do with how long it takes to make an HD game. And Wii games don't take long AT ALL to develop. The only reason Skyward Sword took so long to develop is because Nintendo takes their time to make sure the game will be successful. Should I bring up the pathetic amount of space that Wii discs hold again? Don't give me how much space graphics take up on the disc, because in reality it is you who are overestimating the amount of space graphics actually take up on the disc. Wii games usually have no attention to detail... When I shoot at an object on any particular Wii game, it breaks and disappears 3 seconds later... If I were to shoot at say a vase in Red Dead Redemption, the part of the vase in which I shoot is the only area that actually gets affected, it doesn't totally get obliterated like on pretty much every Wii game. This is just ONE of the hundreds of details that really contribute to the gameplay experience in HD consoles. Wii games have the same attention to detail as there was with last gen games, sometimes even less rofl.

And this is another icing on the cake that Wii games do not have... The Wii lacks the processing power to have games that are comparable to current gen standard game. I can pick out a PS3 game that has a 6/10 and has more details than 60% of all Wii games rofl.

Nintendoftw

#412

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake The slim xbox 360 is a huge improvement over the fact version -_-... I shouldn't even have to name the improvements, because if you don't know then don't bother debating it.

Nintendoftw

#413

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Skyward sword is nowhere near the amount of detail of LA Noire. Being a good game has nothing to do with the amount of detail put into it, LA Noire is one of the most detailed games on this generation. Everything down to even the facial expressions are perfect. And don't give me "Oh it has glitches" because EVERY SINGLE GAME in the history of all of the gaming industry has glitches hinder with the gameplay

Nintendoftw

#414

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster You've played only TWO btw? Rofl. And Monster Hunter isn't even a contender for the best online of this generation... Lol you say that because Monster Hunter is most likely the ONLY Wii game that has online comparable to HD console standards...

TrueWiiMaster

#415

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
All 3 Modern Warfares were almost exactly 2 years apart, releasing in November of 2007, 2009, and 2011 respectively. Like I said, I wasn't counting Black Ops.

Interesting. So you're telling me that Uncharted 2 got it's much larger budget before they knew whether or not the series would be popular? It's also interesting that Bungie was making two Halos at the same time... and yet one looks far better than the other... Did they cheap out on ODST or did they completely revamp the engine and graphics in 1 year? I think your ideas might be a little flawed. Any evidence to back up those claims?

The 360 and Wii both have the same amount of space on discs (at least before the fairly recent update; I heard Xbox increased it somehow). If the Wii's space is pathetic, then so is the 360's, and many games are on both the 360 and PS3, so they only take a pathetic amount of space.

"The only reason Skyward Sword took so long to develop is because Nintendo takes their time to make sure the game will be successful." And why did Gran Turismo take that long exactly?

And you're telling me every HD game, or even a majority of HD games, have the same amount of detail as Red Dead? I'm pretty sure that's not true at all.

HD allows for more detail. That's basic knowledge. Or did you mean detail like shooting a vase and having it explode? That kind of thing isn't too common on ANY platform.

I've played 2 major FRANCHISES. 3 Halo's and 3 Modern Warfares, and Unreal Tournament 3. You think those games don't have good enough online experiences for me to know what playing online is like from them? I haven't played Battlefield, Uncharted, or Killzone (I have played Resistance, but only in local play) and I have no interest in Gears. Are those not the best online HD games?

Few games on any platform require the strategy and teamwork of Monster Hunter. Different classes and items can be of the utmost importance, and some of the online monsters would be almost impossible (not an exaggeration) without teammates. You see, the monsters available online are much stronger than their equivalents in the one player mode to make up for the team option, and there are several monsters which can only be fought online. I didn't say it was the "best online of this generation". I said it was one of the best.

I love how you say I haven't played enough online games to judge them, even though I've played 7 this gen, and then immediately claim Monster Hunter's online isn't comparable to online in HD games even though you've never played it at all! Just because it's on the Wii doesn't mean it doesn't have great online.

You haven't showed a glitch in Mario Galaxy that hinders gameplay... Just one that you have to go out of your way to find...

The 360 slim is better than the original (of course, the original was wracked with problems...) but Bully was made for the ORIGINAL 360. Any glitches seen in it while playing on the original system were glitches left there by the developer. In other words, the opposite of polish: neglect.

Nintendoftw

#416

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster So you're saying that less than a year is enough time to completely revamp the engine that ODST had and add tons more to it...? IT WAS IN DEVELOPMENT ALONGSIDE IT.

Quake

#417

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Well one thing's for certain, they didn't fix the RRoD, and that alone destroys any possibility of real improvement over the fat. And unless you have something other than your word saying Bully SE runs better on the slim then you're stuck where you are. Do you even own/have owned a 360?

Again you're making assumptions. Have you played every single game ever created in its original format? Not likely. So you can't speak on behalf of every game.

You contradicted yourself in the response (#418). How can everything be perfect, based on the definition of perfect, if there are imperfections? Glitches count as imperfections. Also, perfection is relative. Some people say that Uncharted has much more perfect facial animations than L.A. Noire.

Nintendoftw

#418

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And no, none of them are the best online HD games.... Halo is definitely a contender of course, but COD sucks online, the only reason so many people buy it is because... Well some people are stupid.. Why would they be willing to buy the exact same game year after year, theres no other explanation. I can go ahead and look at Monster Hunter's online capabilities and judge from that, the amount of fun to be had is something else... I have PS3 games with more online capability than Monster Hunter.... I mean I am not going to lie, monster hunter has impressive online capabilities, but it definitely is not better than some of the PS3 games that I have seen... Co-op is pretty much standard in a lot of games in the HD consoles... And this is yet another reason you'd be better off buying an HD console.

Nintendoftw

#419

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Glitches cannot count as every game ever created has them... It's a permanent part of gaming as a whole. And LA Noire has new facial animation technology that pretty much enables REAL people to act out the facial animation for the entire game.

Nintendoftw

#420

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster SO you've played 7 online HD games... And don't have a HD console... Where I have an HD console, 17 games, and a Wii console, with about 12 games... And yet I am somehow at a disadvantage.

Quake

#421

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Uncharted has the benefit of having Mo-cap and facial animation capture at the same time, which prevents those strange occurrences in L.A. Noire where the face of a character doesn't match up with the body as well as it could have because they splice together the face of the actor with the movement of the actor. The face animations in L.A. Noire are quite superb, but because of the splice the body animations end up suffering. With Uncharted you end up getting the whole package, quality facial animation and quality body animation that line up in a realistic manner.

You still can't say that every game has glitches unless you've played every game.

MathChamp

#422

MathChamp said:

About one of TrueWiiMaster's comments every game has to have at least one glitch or else the game would take forever to develop

Quake

#423

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw As far as I can tell, Megaman Network Transmission for the Gamecube has no glitches. What you been saying, how "EVERY SINGLE GAME in the history of all of the gaming industry has glitches" is theory and conjecture, completely lacking any proof.

Sweet, comparing owned games. Hmm... I own 21 PS3 games on disc, around 3 games on the PS3 HDD that are purchasable on disc but I got off the download for one reason or another. 29 Wii games on disc. And around 5 360 games because I shaved my collection once M$ broke my system. None of this is counting any games that are downloaded to either system and not purchasable on disc or games that I've traded in. This must mean I have the greatest advantage out of the three of us because I have the most HD generation games.

TrueWiiMaster

#425

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I think you misread my post again. I said, "It's also interesting that Bungie was making two Halos at the same time... and yet one looks far better than the other... Did they cheap out on ODST or did they completely revamp the engine and graphics in 1 year?" You said they were making both ODST and Reach at the same time. I said that if that's true, why does one look so much better than the other when it had less than a year more development time? In order to make the graphical difference between ODST and Reach happen, they had to boost their engine and/or do plenty of fine-tuning. If they did that before ODST was released, why didn't they apply it to ODST? Were they saving it for Reach to make it look newer? Or are you saying they could have done all of that in the 1 year release difference? And if they did do it all in that 1 year, what did they do for Reach while ODST was being developed? Your theory seems fishy...

What are some of the best online games then? In your opinion, what are the top ten online games this gen?

The co-op in Monster Hunter is more involved than in many games. Most of the time co-op is more like one player with a buddy. Monster Hunter is different because not only do you have a person playing with you, but you NEED to in order to have a chance. If your teamwork is bad, you're likely to fail. Communication is necessary.

What "online capabilities" are lacking in Monster Hunter?

"And this is yet another reason you'd be better off buying an HD console". What, for online games? Thanks but no thanks. In a few years, their servers will go down, making online-focused games useless. Playing online games can be fun, but with an expiration date I don't find them worth it.

Yes, when discussing Monster Hunter you are at more of a disadvantage than I am discussing online games. Why? Because I've played online games, and you haven't played Monster Hunter. Also, how can you talk about the Wii's overall library while only owning a dozen Wii games? You only own 10 more HD games than I've played online and think you're the expert (I've played a few more that weren't online too, btw)? I mean, games are expensive, but you shouldn't really be using those numbers to justify your positions. They're not at all impressive.

Nintendoftw

#428

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster ROFL. Considering that I HAVE 17 PS3 games... Do you really want to know how many i've rented and played...? If you want to say who's played the most HD console games then I could definitely talk a lot about that one.

Nintendoftw

#429

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Nope, I have played online HD games, and I have a Wii and have online Wii games... Wii's online is not even comparable to the PSP's online... And the PSP has DLC, games with co-op, games with competitive play, games with 32 player online, and this is pretty much the norm in a lot of the PSP's better games... The DS and the Wii are equal in terms of online play. This is good for the DS, but bad for the Wii... The fact that the Wii only has one online game that is comparable to most HD console games js laughable. I mean c'mon dude... I admit a lot of co-op games don't increase difficulty, but most do... Check out Socom 4, it's online play is definitely better than Monster Hunters'... And may I make a huge point here: If Socom 4 was ported to the Wii everything included from the PS3 version, the game would get near to a 10/10... Why? Wii expectations are drastically lower than HD console expectations.

TrueWiiMaster

#430

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
How does playing any number of online HD games and/or Wii games give you the ability to judge one of the Wii's best games without playing it? Even if you think the Wii's online play is less than the PSP's (I don't agree), online play is not something built into the system so much as something built into the games.

BTW, what PSP game has 32 player online? Most HD system games don't even have that...

I'll admit the Wii has few online games that are comparable to the good online HD games, but the HD systems have few one player games that are comparable to the Wii's good one player games. I'd actually prefer the one player games because they'll be good forever, while the online games, as I said earlier, have an invisible expiration date. If you don't agree, ask yourself this. Would the PS3 still be as great with zero online?

Socom 4? Seriously? Talk about hard to compare. A game with large varying environments, ranging from jungle to tundra to desert and beyond, huge, extremely challenging monsters, and massive customization versus a shooter. I would certainly hope Socom 4 has more online modes than Monster Hunter, because that's how the game plays! Monster Hunter is about hunting monsters. When you play online you hunt monsters. It doesn't need any other modes. Socom did.

And from what I could tell, "if Socom 4 was ported to the Wii everything included from the PS3 version" it would probably score an 8-9. If the gameplay's not a ten, it wouldn't get a ten. Of course, if that could happen in the first place the Wii would BE an HD system. Wii games graphics may not be scored in comparison to HD games, but the games themselves are as good or better than anything on the market. Examples? Most 1st party titles, most Capcom Wii games, and a bunch of exceedingly unique and fun games that are lesser known than they should be.

Quake

#431

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Yes, a puzzle game. You didn't look at Megaman Network Transmission at all quite obviously.

Have you ever even owned a PSP, cause I have. As far as I know the only game with 32 person online multiplayer is Medal of Honor Heroes 2. Which would mean that 32 person online is not the norm.

You're kidding. Socom 4, the game that was the last dying breath of Zipper Interactive, being better than Monster Hunter? Socom 4 was a major disappointment to most anyone who played it. Shall we bring up the DLC that a lot of people paid for but never ended up getting (Socom Pro)? Or the lack of Demolition mode at launch? Maybe the campaign mode that went with a more cinematic approach that fans of Socom 1,2, and 3 hated? Socom 4 got low scores across Metacritics critic section and can't be compared to Monster Hunter Tri. Not to mention the abandoned by the devs online that has a lot of glitches still permeating its very existence. (But according to you patches are a good thing, I guess we'll just wait for the now shut-down Zipper Interactive to patch the glitches.)

We've already covered how your perception of the consumers expectations is incorrect. (Refer back to the ragdoll physics section.)

TrueWiiMaster

#432

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You're the one who mentioned collections, not me. I never said I played as many HD games anyway! I just said you didn't own very many more than I have played! I wasn't saying I was the HD expert, just that you weren't much of one with so few games!

Quake

#433

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I could also talk heavily about how many HD generation games I've played, considering I have 24 on the PS3 alone. Played numerous others not counting the ones on the 360.

Nintendoftw

#434

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Considering the fact that PS3 has more single player games than multiplayer games, no, the Wii's single player games fail compared to most HD console games... All you keep bringing up is Nintendo exclusives and Monster hunter because we all know the ONLY good games on the Wii are Nintendo exclusives.. Games like Red Dead Redemption (lol I keep using that game) beat out 65% of the Wii's library in story, attention to detail, and the size of the game (Red Dead Redemption's map is ridiculously large). Don't say "I haven't played 65% of Wii games because I HAVE A WII and every time I go to buy a new PS3 game I always check the Wii shelf to see if any good games are available, but all I see is games that I could either get on my PSP, games that are for children, and games that are downright terrible... Then theres the 15% that are either Nintendo exclusive or actually good...

Nintendoftw

#435

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake That doesn't mean anything. I was pointing out that I have a Wii and PS3.

And it's hilarious because I have had my Wii since 2007 and had had my PS3 for only almost a year now ROFL... The Wii is terrible.

Nintendoftw

#436

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake However horrible Socom 4 is it is still better than the average Wii game...

http://www.youtube.com/user/wiiviewr?ob=4

This is a channel I used to like to watch reviews from when I actually thought the Wii was the best of the three systems (When all I had was a Wii). I remember asking the guy to stop reviewing terrible games and calling them good because it would give the Wii a bad name. Lol it turns out THATS ALL THE WII GAMES HE COULD FIND. rofl.

TrueWiiMaster

#437

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I don't recall saying the PS3 had more or less single player games than the the Wii. Only that most of its one player games aren't as good as the Wii's. And in innovation, polish, uniqueness, and fun, that's true.

Ummm, of course I'm only talking about Wii exclusives. Multiplatform games are few on the Wii. I'm glad you agree though. Games exclusive to the Wii are usually good.

And games like Mario Galaxy beat out 65% of HD games in polish, uniqueness, and fun. What's your point?

I wouldn't say you "haven't played 65% of Wii games" in response to that. I'd say that the 12 you own far from cover all the best Wii games out there, and you should shop at a new store.

Based on how many PS3 games you found worth buying, I have to think that shelf didn't offer a ton either...

I didn't know the PSP was getting so many Wii games (or vice versa). What are they?

Are the "games that are for children" including Mario, Kirby, and other games that aren't actually "games that are for children"?

P.S.- Wouldn't you agree that Red Dead also beat out at least 65% of PS3 games "in story, attention to detail, and the size of the game"?

TrueWiiMaster

#438

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I'm so glad that you mentioned the Wiiviewr! I've watched almost every review he's put up and followed him for a long time. You're completely wrong about "THATS ALL THE WII GAMES HE COULD FIND". He prefers to find games that no one's ever heard of, play them, and review them. It makes his channel more interesting, because he is sometimes the only reviewer to touch the games he reviews. He does review famous games, but his focus has always been lesser games. I mean, do you really think he couldn't find anything better than the 2-3 Barbie games he reviewed?

Nintendoftw

#442

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster The Wii is not unique or innovative... The only thing "innovative" you can name about it is the motion controls, which had already been done by sony back in 2001... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isHJAyCICw4

And the power glove wasn't developed by Nintendo..

SOME of it's games are innovative, but not unique.. Games like Jet Set Radio are unique... My Little Pony is not unique.

Quake

#443

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Socom 4 was worse than the average Wii game. If you think Socom 4 is better than the average Wii game (wherever the benchmark may be for the average Wii game) that just means that you haven't played very Wii games. Many are far superior.

It's quite funny really, how you point the direction of the conversation in a completely irrelevant direction. You do know that the Wiiviewer purposely reviews games that are generally lesser known? That's not all of the Wii games he could find, he tries to find games that others can't find. Whether or not your local Gamestop has the games he reviews would be a reflection of the people that live in your community.

Nintendoftw

#444

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster I suppose I would agree that Red Dead is one of the best games on the HD systems... But still, i've played the very best on the Wii (Super Smash Bros, Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy, etc) and although they are all very fun EVERY SINGLE TIME I get a 3rd party wii game that has a good review, in reality it's just as fun as playing a PS2 game... And let's face it, PS3 games are more fun than PS2 games...

Quake

#445

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Jet Set Radio is not on a Nintendo console, it's on the GBA. So in other words that was a poor example. Jet Grind Radio will be on the PS3/360 download this summer and that game was exclusively on the Dreamcast.

Again, percentages not backed by math.

TrueWiiMaster

#447

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I'm pretty sure the Wiiviewr hasn't reviewed half of the Wii's catalog, first of all. And secondly, even if the Wii's library was 70% shovelware, what would that prove? It certainly wouldn't mean there would be fewer excellent games on the Wii.

Did I say the PS3's terrible? I don't think the PS3's terrible.

The Wii's not terrible, in fact it's pretty great, because 1. It revolutionized gaming controls, 2. Allowed for many innovative ideas to be made real, 3. has had fewer technical problems than its competition, 4. is cheaper than its competition, 5. is easy to develop for, and 6. it's made by Nintendo. You might think that last one is stupid, but it makes more sense than you think. By being produced by Nintendo, the Wii has had the guarantee of Nintendo games, which even you agree are awesome. It also means that the company who made the NES, SNES, N64, and Gamecube are behind it. Nintendo is the only company that is 5 for 5 in console success (4 for 4 before the Wii).

Did you read the description for the video you posted? It said that was never released. Even if it was, being able to draw in the air is very different from swordplay.

"The only thing "innovative" you can name about it is the motion controls". Now tell me how PS3 innovated. Motion controls were huge. What did the HD systems do that can compare?

Okay, so Nintendo didn't make the power glove. Those people were the first to use motion gaming on a console.

My Little Pony could be unique. I've never personally played it or looked into it. It could have very creative gameplay for all I know. If you can tell me that it wasn't innovative, I guess that means you have played it. Surely you're not jumping to conclusions based solely on a game's name/license!

Trauma Center, Wii Sports, Red Steel 2, and Punch Out were all games that relied on the Wii's exclusive controls, but the Wiimote also innovated controls in general, allowing light gun-esque play, a steering wheel, an NES remote, and an invisible button all to exist on one little remote.

I doubt I'll ever agree that PS2 games are intrinsically worse than PS3 games. The PS3 can't compare to the PS2 in platformers or RPG's, 2 of my favorite genres, and neither system has the advantage in fighters.

And GET MONSTER HUNTER! If you've really invested so much time into looking for good 3rd party Wii games, why haven't you gotten the biggest one?

Nintendoftw

#448

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake ALL of the games he's reviews can be found on my local store's shelf, rather I go to Target or Gamestop, all of the Wii games are little kiddie games. And a reflection of the people that live in my community? ROFL... Where did you even get that....? Games don't ship based on statistics -_-.

Nintendoftw

#449

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Monster Hunter is very far from my type of game... I don't like RPGs, and I HATE JRPGs... I can't stress my dislike of JRPGs enough.

And the Wii didn't "revolutionize" the industry... I will be the first to admit that the PS3 is not innovative, GAMING SYSTEMS DO NOT HAVE TO BE INNOVATIVE. That's the main thing Nintendo fails to understand... You don't have to try to do something new every gen and then let processing power take a hit because of it... And even though it was never released, one part of it WAS released, that is the Eye Toy, and NO it was not a failure, it was actually pretty fun.

Quake

#450

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw That was based off of the "kiddie" games you've mentioned, My (series) and My Little Pony. First off, I know that the My (series) was released a couple years ago which means it's no longer in production and Gamestop doesn't have it under the new category anymore. Which means someone in your community bought it and traded it in, simple as that.

Secondly, it turns out that you never saw any My Little Pony game for the Wii because it doesn't exist! Funny enough it does exist on the DS, the system that you think is better for gamers. Just checked, go try it yourself.

Nintendoftw

#451

Nintendoftw said:

The PS3 is magnificent without innovation... And if you want innovation, look at the xbox 360... Kinect is innovative, how could it not be? It is VERY far from a beefed up Eye Toy, it is arguably the most advanced camera to ever be used in gaming.

Nintendoftw

#452

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Cooking Mama, Just about EVERY animated kid movie game, Petz, Barbie, Hannah Montana, shall I go on? Even though the DS has a lot of these games, it has MANY other games to make up for it... The DS library is DRASTICALLY larger than the Wii's.

Quake

#453

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Hmm, those game are not targeted towards kids as a whole, they are targeted towards young girls. That is, unless you would have wanted to play Barbie Hannah Montana, Petz and Cooking Mama when you were a kid, because I know I would not have. But if you did want to play them then I could see how you would think those games are targeted towards kids as a whole.

TrueWiiMaster

#455

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
It figures that one of the PS2's fortes is a genre you hate... No wonder you think the PS3 is better!

If the Wii didn't revolutionize the industry (I just said controls, but whatever) then why did Microsoft and Sony, after the Wii's huge success, release their own motion peripherals? And why is Sony's so similar to the Wii's? They realized motion gaming had something to offer that a traditional controller couldn't, and they wanted to cash in.

Nintendo doesn't always innovate, and the Wii is the first Nintendo system not to at least match the competition's tech when it came out (except for the neo geo, whose price was outrageous). If you look at their track record, they usually innovate, improve, innovate, improve, and so on. With the NES they made the D pad. The SNES was a SUPER NES. With the N64, they introduced a joystick and 3D environments. With the Gamecube, they made the controller better and gave the system more power. With the Wii they came out with motion controls, and honestly I was expecting the Wii's successor to be a super Wii. The Wii U is the first time Nintendo is putting innovation on top of innovation. It should be awesome.

Though companies don't need to innovate the industry every gen, Playstation hasn't innovated hardware-wise since dual analog on the PS1. They could do with something new.

Nintendoftw

#456

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Nope, not all of them. The WIi has more than the HD consoles, developers seem to shy out on the PS3/360 because developing for it is more expensive and they get more sales with Wii development anyway

Nintendoftw

#457

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster No... They don't need anything new. I mean sure when it comes up, no problem with the PS4 having something new, but thy certainly do not need to... ESPECIALLY if they cut down the hardware because of it... The Wii could have been a huge success among ALL Nintendo fans, if it was at least 3-4x the power of the gamecube, but it wasn't a REAL successor. Let's face it, most Wii games can be ran on the gamecube. It would be stupid to deny that out of any other gen, the Wii drove out more Nintendo fans than ANY OTHER system that Nintendo has released... They should have made the Wii primarily support the classical controller and secondarily support the wiimote technology, and upped the processing power to be at the least a bit behind the xbox 360, another thing Nintendo keeps failing at... It's NOT a race to see who can put out their next gen system first, they need to wait and watch to see what happens before making their move.

TrueWiiMaster

#458

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
The PS2 released first last gen (unless you count the Dreamcast) and won that gen. The 360 came out first this gen, and so far has beat the PS3. Getting a jump on the competition can be huge.

The Wii also brought back a lot of Nintendo fans, fans who wanted old school gaming like side-scrollers. The VC also made the Wii a must-own system for any true Nintendo fan, whether they liked the motion controls or not.

I'd say the Wii was a success with most Nintendo fans. The ones who left for HD weren't Nintendo fans so much as general gaming fans, chasing the prettiest graphics.

"The Wii could have been a huge success among ALL Nintendo fans, if it was at least 3-4x the power of the gamecube". If Nintendo had focused on power then the Wii would have been more expensive, less successful, and riddled with the problems of HD systems. The only gain would have been direct ports of the 3rd party games that make up the majority of the HD catalog.

The PS3 lacks the 2 genres that made Playstation successful. No Playstation has turned away more fans of those genres than the PS3. PS1 and PS2 were both famous for RPGs and Platformers. The PS3 is famous for HD and being a bluray player...

Quake

#459

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I'd love to know what games you're speaking of, because Toy Story 3, Wall-E, Tin Tin, Phineas and Ferb, Bolt, Spiderman 3,Transformers, The Bourne Conspiracy, PotC, Rango, Rio, Cars Happy Feet 2 and Kung Fu Panda 1and 2 all have movie games on the PS3. I'm sure I missed some others on the PS3.

TrueWiiMaster

#461

TrueWiiMaster said:

@MathChamp
I didn't forget. I left it out on purpose. That game is not exclusive to the PS3 or HD systems. No matter which console you have you can play Rayman Origins. You can even play it on both current portables (that is, when it actually comes out on the 3DS)!

Nintendoftw

#462

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Stop bringing up how much HD graphics contribute, because they DON'T... Like at all. HD gaming is old. And PS3/360 are both lacking in the HD compartment anyway because the vast majority of the games aren't native 1080p... HD gaming is not new, and it wasn't new when the HD consoles hit the shelves either, and even IF the console was more expensive, NINTENDO FANS WOULD BUY IT ANYWAY... Look at the N64, did YOU care about the price? The fact that the Wii didn't support most 3rd party games that were on the HD consoles is a HUGE factor, because those 3rd party games kick the hell out of the Wii's third party support.

Nintendoftw

#463

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And Sony didn't lose a lot of support with the PS3, YES I would definitely say when it first launch at 599$ it lost crap loads of support, but over time (Notably 2008/2009) sony fans came flocking back to a console with more games, slimmer, and more exclusives... Although Sony may be missing out on porting some exclusives to the PS3, it doesn't matter! Because the PS2 had WAY too many exclusives to port anyway, and current sony exclusives are a heck of a lot better than before, even though it's not quite as diverse... Nintendo could have DESTROYED the 360 and PS3 in both sales AND fan support if they actually didn't make such pathetic hardware... The Wii is a PRIME example of why hardware is important... Sales mean NOTHING to real gamers, they just want great games, and plenty of them... And Wii has more shovelware than anything, and the games that ARE great just do not look as intense and fun in comparison to a PS3/360 game... The only games that DO are first party games made by Nintendo.

Quake

#464

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Need to check your history on that one. The N64 didn't get great games that it would have had it used CDs. FF7 (probably 8 and 9 as well) and Dragon Quest 7 would have been on the N64 had the N64 used CDs. Not to mention that some of the games that were ported to the N64 from the PS1 had to loose content because of the size limits, i.e. RE2 (fun fact, RE2 on the N64 was partially ported by Angel Studios, who is now Rockstar San Diego).

Nintendoftw

#468

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I have No More Heroes, I liked the style but the game was boring... No More Heroes 2 looks way better. MadWorld doesn't look very intense... At all really... Not in comparison to that small mission I showed of GTA IV, lol you have yet to see how insane the multiplayer could get... Why can't the Wii run such an intense game? PROCESSING POWER...

Quake

#469

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw You yet to show me any legitimate source that specifies the Wii's processing power. Obviously the Wii couldn't run GTA4 with the graphics of the PS3 or 360, but it still comes down to developers not making games comparable to that in terms of gameplay for the Wii. Based off of the clientele of the Wii it probably wouldn't do very well, but neither have any E rated 3-D platformers for the HD generation.

Quake

#470

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw And the lack of "mature" games on the Wii is "pathetic" according to you. But how is the lack of E (everyone) games on the HD systems not pathetic? Is that a double-standard? Yes.

Nintendoftw

#471

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake No E rated platformers...? Ratchet And Clank...? Little Big Planet (This game ALONE destroys ANY wii 3rd party platformer). Batman Arkham City..?

And the Wii can NEVER be able to run GTA IV... It can't even run a watered down version... I doubt the PSVita could even run all of GTA IV

Quake

#472

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw You neglected one portion of the sentence. I said E rated 3-D platformers. The only Ratchet and Clank on the PS3 that is rated E, not E10, is All 4 One. LBP is automatically dis-qualified because it's a side-scroller and is at most 2.5D, similar to some levels in Crash Bandicoot for PS1. Batman AC is T...

I never said that the Wii would be limited to GTA4, there are such things as spin offs, i.e. Liberty City Stories. Also, they could do a better looking GTA3 with online components.

Based off of the video you showed me, whatever system GTA4 was running on also had hiccups in the engine, which means that the system was having issues running GTA4.

Nintendoftw

#473

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Exactly.... If you want to be able to say "All HD console gamers care about is graphics" then you are look at the wrong people, GO PICK WITH A PC GAMER ON THAT ONE.... People who actually are tired of playing the same games with the same graphics with the same physics engines with the same story length are the ones who move onto consoles that can actually run MORE than all of that... GTA IV is over 100 missions long, not counting the side missions, online play, and DLC content...

Quake

#474

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Then what is the benefit of an HD system over the Wii? Graphics, nope. Sound is best on PS3. Additional content on disc, nope, because the Wii has the same sized disc as the 360, and PS3 games are on the 360. Physics, increased on HD systems, but not to the point of going out and buying a console. AI, comes down to the developers. Story doesn't have any relativity to the power of a console. Engines have the ability to progress while a console is going, if they didn't then why does Chaos Theory look so much better than Splinter Cell 1. Last generation engines weren't even pushed that hard, for example, Halo 2 has really bad popping textures that were also recycled throughout the levels, this could havve been remedied had they created another game or created something similar to Megatexture. Online, not really, I say this because I've yet to have my account hacked on the Wii, but have had it hacked several times on the 360, which is an HD system. Also, the online of current HD generation games should have started out better than it did because they already had benchmarks on consoles from last generation, but it didn't. I mean really, host switch mid game when the original host quits was FINALLY introduced around 2009. Did I leave anything out?

Xenoblade has more content than probably anything on the HD consoles. Not counting the multiplayer modes of anything, because how much it is used is relative to the player, I would still be playing Chaos Theory on the Xbox had they not enforced its expiration date, like they will with ALL online games at some point unless you can run your own server like in Quake on the PC.

Nintendoftw

#475

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Xenoblade does not compare to Skyrim in amount of content... You haven't had your account hacked on the Wii because YOU DON'T HAVE AN ACCOUNT ON THE WII? Rofl what do you think this is? The 3DS? It doesn't have Nintendo Network support...

Nintendoftw

#476

Nintendoftw said:

And HD console physics engines makes Wii physics engines look like they come from 1998... The RAGE engine destroys ANY wii engine that you could ever think of, including boom blox....

TrueWiiMaster

#477

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I don't know if you realize this, but you just gave me some pretty interesting ammo. Though power-wise the N64 was at least on par with the competition, it did have two major problems: cartridge space and difficulty in development. You said, "The fact that the Wii didn't support most 3rd party games that were on the HD consoles is a HUGE factor...", but the N64 had some pretty significant problems with 3rd party support itself. Due to the space and ease of discs, many 3rd party games were exclusive to the PS1, and the games on both platforms often looked/played better on the PS1. It could be easily argued that the N64 survived on its 1st party titles, and yet you have no problem with the it. Why is that?

You think the PS3's big exclusives, Uncharted, Killzone, MGS 4, and Resistance (not all but definitely some of the biggest), are better than the PS2's big exclusives, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper, Jak and Daxter, Final Fantasy, Tekken, MGS 2 and 3, and Dragon Quest? That's okay. You're welcome to your opinion. I, however, disagree completely.

You think that if Nintendo had made a system comparable in specs to the 360, they "could have DESTROYED the 360 and PS3 in both sales AND fan support"? The Gamecube was on par with the competing consoles last gen, and yet it came in last. In fact, the weakest of the three systems won by a landslide! And yet, you're saying that, if they had done the same thing again, they would have gotten the opposite result? Why?

The Wii does have shovelware. Again, so what? I don't buy it. I would think no real gamer would. So what difference does it make? There are plenty of Wii games that are awesome, and they aren't all 1st party (not that that should make any difference; if the 1st party games can't compete then the Wii might as well not be made by Nintendo).

"...the games that ARE great just do not look as intense and fun in comparison to a PS3/360 game..." Purely your opinion. I think Monster Hunter, Excitebots, and Sin and Punishment look as intense as any game out there, and I'd say Wii games tend to look MORE fun than HD console games. Or can you tell me what game on PS3 looks as fun as Brawl, Mario Kart, or New Super Mario? Nintendo has always excelled at making fun games, and that's one category they wouldn't lose.

And if you want intensity, try these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjbvp9hsZy8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qSAax9WTNQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WALi1nmONc

Nintendoftw

#478

Nintendoftw said:

Additional content is a YES. The Xbox 360, unlike the Wii, when handling large multiplat games uses multiple discs... PS3 games go up to 50 GB in space and the Wii's discs are terrible in comparison.... Graphics are a YES because HD consoles obviously have drastically better graphics... And YES graphics do matter because they add on to the game, just like story, sound, and controls... And saying online is not an advantage? I can't take any more of your comments serious on forward.... That makes me doubt that you even own an HD system, although you seem to have some knowledge on them anyway. ANYONE with an HD system would understand how big of a part that online plays in the current gen market, and seeing as though the WIi's online is inferior to the PSP's, that is the biggest advantage..

And another advantage is 3rd party support... Wii third party support is absolutely horrendous... While HD console third party support is wonderful.

TrueWiiMaster

#480

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
"And another advantage is 3rd party support... Wii third party support is absolutely horrendous... While HD console third party support is wonderful."
Even if this was true, and it isn't, Wii 1st party support blows away most HD 3rd party support.

The Wii could have used multiple discs if necessary. The Gamecube did. The 360 still has no space advantage on discs over the Wii.

Online can add alot to a game, but it can also add nothing. If I have no extra ethernets and no wifi, COD becomes a $60 4 hour game to me. The same goes for people with no internet access (hey, there's gotta be a couple of them out there). It's value can be hard to place. It's really relative to the gamer. Even if I have internet access, I might not like the communities in any given game, making online less fun. Or maybe I just prefer to play by myself! That's not a ridiculous preference, but it certainly narrows down which games to get on the HD consoles...

TrueWiiMaster

#481

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Oh, and then there are still those expiration dates, and the way online communities tend to migrate to the latest games, which come out almost annually. Try playing Modern Warfare 2 now. It's community has shrunken by a huge degree.

Nintendoftw

#482

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Dude if you are going to give me examples of intense games AT LEAST try.... I mean seriously, really? Monster Hunter footage looked very disappointing compared to MOST of the games that I have on my PS3.... Excitebots is not as intense as Wipeout HD... Monster Hunter isn't intense at all. And should I bring up Battlefield 3 again to combat the MW3 gameplay?

Heres a game that is pretty old and yet still is more intense...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrnm6SeAaRI

Please note, unlike Wii games NONE of this is scripted and is just an everyday moment in Battlefield: Bad Company 2... And really I didn't try to even find intense footage, I clicked the first thing I saw lol.

TrueWiiMaster

#483

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
If you think the GTA video you posted was more intense than the ones I posted, we clearly have different ideas of what makes a game intense. Monster Hunter is definitely intense. Maybe its intensity is hard to get from a video if you haven't played the game. Actually facing down the monster yourself makes a difference.

The Monster Hunter and Excitebots videos weren't scripted at all. They were both regular gameplay. The MW3 video was in one player mode, but it wasn't cut or changed. I don't know if that would be considered scripted or not.

Quake

#486

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw You do realize that Skyrims doesn't really count because it has side quests that are randomly generated, which theoretically means the game never really ends.

My Wii account is my Wii friend code, which is not system transferable unless you work at Nintendo, so it's impossible to hack.

Rage has the best physics engine currently on the market, but that alone is not why I bought the game or why I bought my PS3, my statement still stands.

Wrong on the multiplat part. The 360 does have exclusives that use more than 1 disc. Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey have 3 discs, both 360 exclusives, probably others have this as well.

It's not that ridiculous to say that online isn't an advantage. It's nothing new, the Dreamcast was the first system to start online play, and it's over 10 years old. Not to mention that all online games will expire at some point, once they shut the servers down say good bye to your high level BF3 account. (EA actually is shutting down some PS3 servers already.) But if you wanna see something that shows the true colors of online go sign in with your PS3 and load up MW1, you won't be able to play it unless you do some specific things to bypass the (most likely) uploaded hack. Have fun! Where did I mention online not being an advantage?

Quake

#487

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Wow, are you really serious? Really? If what you meant lines up with what I think you meant that is the most ignorant comment I've heard in a while... Based off of how TrueWiiMaster only mentioned id Tech 5 in regards to engines my comment makes sense in context. Rage is MADE on id Tech 5! Rage is made by id Software... Who makes id Tech... And they made id Tech 5... And you believe yourself to be some kind of authority on HD games? Specifically shooters? id invented the FPS.

TrueWiiMaster

#488

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
"Rofl that engine looks like garbage compared to RAGE, especially the RAGE physics engine." Are you referring to idTech 5, because I don't think I mentioned any other engines. If you are, you should look it up. You might be surprised...

"Excitebots still is inferior to Wipeout in intensity". I'm sorry to tell you this, but explosions alone don't make a game intense. Excitebots has a much greater sense of speed and requires split-second reactions regularly.

Kid Icarus is also a fast-paced shooter/brawler built around constant action. It's more intense than most games (including PS3 games) because it's built on intensity!

Nintendoftw

#489

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster It narrows them down, but the single player focused games on the HD consoles like Mass Effect and BioShock certainly are great for those type of gamers...And however much I love Nintendo exclusives EVEN THEY are affected by the Wii's pathetic power... And just first party games, even if they are Nintendo, do not stand a chance against hundreds of great 3rd party games...

Would you buy a 250$ Nintendo console if ALL it had were Nintendo exclusives and nothing more...? NO. I need Nintendo exclusives along with other great 3rd party games...

Nintendoftw

#490

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster ROFL NO. Have you even PLAYED any game remotely similar to wipeout? F-Zero would even count.... I don't even have to PLAY excitebots to know that it is a hell of a lot slower paced than Wipeout. Wipeout runs at a constant 60 FPS and speeds on average are in the 1000s in mph... It is by far one of the most intense racing games there is... I mean seriously??? C'mon, wipeout being slower paced than excitebots? That is like an insult...

Kid Icarus is definitely intense, but I have plenty of PS3 games and can still say even though it is more intense than most, BF3 still beats it in intensity.

Nintendoftw

#491

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Although I must admit that to be a hilarious mistake, the fact that you still undermine the importance of online play, even into the next generation of consoles, is nothing short of ignorant and laughable.

Nintendoftw

#492

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake You continuously mention online play having an expiration date, even so does that make it ANY less fun? How many years did it take Xbox Live for the Xbox to go down?

TrueWiiMaster

#493

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
"hundreds of great 3rd party games..." Wow. Seriously? Wow. There aren't hundreds of great 3rd party titles on ANY system. Unless you count certain spammed games individually (COD, Assassin's Creed, etc), you'd be lucky to have more than 2 dozen great 3rd party games on either (maybe even both) HD console. Nintendo can compete with that.

"Would you buy a 250$ Nintendo console if ALL it had were Nintendo exclusives and nothing more...? NO." I would. That's part of being a Nintendo fan. Wanting to play Nintendo games. I'm not saying I hate 3rd party support, but Nintendo games will always be the higher priority. When given the choice between every 3rd party game on the PS3 and every 1st party game on the Wii, I'd pick the Wii any day.

I have played F-Zero. It's much better than Wipeout. Even if the number on the bottom of the screen says 1000 mph that's not relevant to the sense of speed. Any game can add an extra zero to the spedometer. In Excitebots you're going so fast that the scenery often becomes a blur. That adds great effect to feeling fast. From what I've seen in Wipeout, it uses the same effect, but it doesn't work as well, simply because there isn't much scenery to blur. There's a big difference between seeing trees fly by and watching a metal track progress quickly. After playing Excitebots, Wipeout just feels a little slow.

"You continuously mention online play having an expiration date, even so does that make it ANY less fun?" Less fun? Not really. Less valuable? Definitely. And even though servers may take years to close, games can still go practically dead if the community just moves to the next installment of their favorite fps.

Quake

#494

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Modern online play generally has far too many problems for it to be very enjoyable. Unless everyone has a similar connection speed there will be instances where lag occurs. Even if there are good internet connections all around anybody can ping the ip of any player lag them and even kick them if they want to, just need a program (or knowledge of programming and internet protocol) and a correct home network setup.

And even still, the online of many last generation games is completely gone, some current generation games are also gone (I don't remember the dates of the sever death days, but I believe it was this month.) I would much rather purchase a game that actually has enough of a focus on single player to where it wouldn't become worthless because of glitches if my HDD crashes and I have no way of obtaining the update because the servers are gone. In that situation the entire game becomes worthless and you spent $60 on a game that becomes a paperweight in 5-8 years. Not to mention the inability to retrieve any DLC you possibly spent a good chunk of money on. You can go and continue the beta testing of BF3, which was more than likely $60 when you got/bought it, which means you spent $60 on a beta, while I go play a game that was built to release instead of test.

I still don't see where I've undermined the importance of online play, all I've done is stated facts.

Quake

#495

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Xbox Live started in late 2002 and ended on February 10, 2010. A total of less than 8 years, around 7 years really. I still get the same value out of my copy of Snake Eater, even in another 10 years I will, but I will never get the same value out of Halo 2 because it was so online heavy.

Nintendoftw

#496

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake BF3 was flawed at launch, yes, but a couple of days to a week later the game was working perfectly.... And the newest update only ADDED to the game so there is more bang for the buck, and even so, WHO PLAYS ONLINE GAMES THAT ARE EIGHT YEARS OLD!? Unless you're poor and can't afford any better, theres absolutely no reason to. And plus the amount of excitement to be had with BF3 exceeds any Wii game's single player component... Because nothing is scripted and the frostbite 2 engine is simply AMAZING. I doubt that you even ever had BF3 because I bought it at launch and the only glitches I have encountered so far was the online bug at launch and graphical glitches.... And ever since I downloaded the patch, the game has been absolutely perfect.... The only thing that is NOT good about BF3 is the single player campaign, and you would have to be really sore to actually trade in BF3 just because there is a mission where you have to kill police officers... DO YOU EVEN KNOW THE STORY OF THE GAME... There is a REASON you have to kill them. And the fact that you traded it on because of one of it's CAMPAIGN components is just stupid, because the game completely revolves around the multiplayer.... And even with the campaign being garbage, its still better than what i've seen on the Wii (The Conduit).

Nintendoftw

#497

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake If you're looking for long standing online games, buy a gaming PC... And Halo 2 was fun without the online anyway...

THE MAJORITY of hd console games are fun without the online... Red Dead, GTA IV, Mass Effect, Bioshock, RAGE, etc.

Nintendoftw

#498

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Buying a 250$ console just for first party games doesn't make you a Nintendo fan, it makes you a fool who got tricked out of their money. If the amount of Nintendo exclusives exceeded the amount of 3rd party games on both the 360 and PS3 then sure, but they don't.

Nintendoftw

#499

Nintendoftw said:

Being a Nintendo fan means that you enjoy Nintendo exclusive games and support Nintendo. Even though I support Nintendo, I will NOT support them becoming another SEGA. Those billions of dollars of bank? That's not a lot.... Especially since I put a situation out where Nintendo would FAIL a gen... Do you know how much money would be lost? Seriously...? Nintendo is not in as good as shape as you may think they are.... The Wii U is in a hole if they keep up the same tactic as before. As I said before, casual gamers have their cell phones or already have Wiis, and if not those two then they have kinect.... Hardcore gamers aren't going to buy it because it will be so weak and pathetic looking next to the xbox 720 and PS4... More Nintendo fans will be lost because a great many think that the Wii is a failure. I don't think you noticed, but most gamers consider the Wii to be a joke, and some even consider Nintendo to be a joke. THAT'S bad news. Considering they are the only ones Nintendo has in the end, because the amount of Sony and Microsoft fans, this gen at least, dwarf the amount of Nintendo fans. The statement is debatable, but without a doubt there are a lot less Nintendo fans than before...

TrueWiiMaster

#500

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I disagree. Wanting the 1st party games most is indeed part of being a Nintendo fan. For me, I buy Nintendo systems for the 1st party games and any 3rd party support is bonus. I don't think 3rd party games are worthless, though. Far from it. I just have much more interest in what Nintendo makes. If I bought the PS3 and/or 360, all I would get would be the 3rd party bonus, and no main course. And I don't think Nintendo's as far behind the number of great 3rd party HD games as you think.

That money they have stored up is enough for them to take significant losses every year for decades. It's a lot of money.

As I said before, the Wii U has the potential to grab casual gamers in all new ways. They aren't a lost cause with the Wii U, despite what you think.

If the Wii U has games like the Wii had, hardcore gamers will buy it. Maybe YOU won't, but hardcore gamers will.

The gamers that think the Wii is a joke are the true casual gamers. Players who think the newest tech is necessary for great games have no place calling themselves gamers. As for me, I'll continue to think the 360 is the biggest joke out there for charging for online play.

"...because the amount of Sony and Microsoft fans, this gen at least, dwarf the amount of Nintendo fans." Then why did Mario Kart alone outsell the vast, VAST majority of HD console games, even the ones on every platform, including the PC? Why did Smash Bros, definitely a gamer's game, sell more than most, perhaps even all, PS3 or 360 exclusives? It outsold Halo Reach, ODST, Gran Turismo 5, every Resistance, every Gears of War, every Killzone, and every Uncharted (not combined of course). I think there are still plenty of Nintendo fans, and general gamers, supporting Nintendo.

Quake

#501

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw BF3's latest patch didn't add any new content to my knowledge, unless it was for the, at the time, two-three month away Close Quarters DLC. I'm beginning to think you don't own BF3 if you've only encountered several glitches. I experienced a major glitch in the first hour of the single player and a major glitch in the first multiplayer match I played, both different glitches.

The story of the game, in the context of the killing of Police and as far as I can tell, was that you are a Russian terrorist trying to get to some kind of nuke in New York. But to get to it you are required to eliminate Police. In end the nuke was not where you thought it was and the city gets blown up. Nothing yet justifies the killing of any Police. And if you recall correctly I said that the killing of Police is ONE of the reasons I traded it in, there are others, mainly glitches. Oh, and by the way, the game is still not glitch free, MAV glitch anyone?

You do realize that whether or not a game is "better" than older games is relative to the player and not based on fact. Many people still play online games that are older than 8 years. Quake 3, UT99, Socom 1 and others all still have a community going. Not because the owners cannot afford newer technology, but because they believe those games to be better than what is currently on the market.

"If you're looking for long standing online games, buy a gaming PC..." There you go again, saying something cheap and/or irrelevant to try and avoid the truth.

I would very highly doubt you even own Rage if you didn't know the developer was id and the engine was id Tech 5. You said at the beginning of the conversation that you can't have a say on whether a game is good or not unless you own it. Another contradiction?

http://playstationlifestyle.net/2012/03/27/dice-releases-battlefield-3-patch-laments-console-certification-process/
BF3 1.04 patch notes. How is this getting more bang for you buck? Look at all those problems they fixed. Probably the longest patch notes I've ever seen.

Nintendoftw

#502

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Casual gamers DO NOT CARE about crap like new HD graphics... The Wii U offers NOTHING new... The new controller isn't actually new, because the PSVita and the PS3 have the same functionality... What do you think the "Never stop gaming" campaign is about..? Casual gamers have everything that they need and more WITHOUT the Wii U. Smart phones are enough to hold them, but then they have the Wii and 360... And why in the world would they buy the Wii U? To them it's just an upgrade of the system that they already have, they don't know it's a successor. ESPECIALLY since the Wii U's primary controls are literally the same controllers as the Wii.

And by hardcore gamers I don't mean people who buy games for the difficulty, I mean MATURE gamers, and they take up the majority of the console market (49%). The only reason Mario Kart sold so well is because it's made by Nintendo AND it appeals to casual gamers, AND kids, same with super smash bros... And NO casual gamers could care less about Nintendo, general gamers have both microsoft and sony, and plus ROFL the majority of people I know (Mostly PC gamers) think the Wii is a complete joke... They can EMULATE super smash bros brawl, so they don't even take the Wii into consideration. Nintendo fans still support Nintendo, but we are a dying breed, while Microsoft and Sony are gaining more fans than losing... Please compare this site's community to a PS3 forum/ Sony fan site... Although maybe slightly you will see Sony sites generally have more accounts.

Nintendoftw

#503

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And plus NO Nintendo cannot take too many losses... You are forgetting about the PRODUCTION COSTS of the Wii U, Nintendo keeps producing Wii U consoles and they don't sale then Nintendo will fail..

Nintendoftw

#504

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake You weren't really paying attention to the story... It's just the opposite. YOU HAVE TO KILL THE POLICE OFFICERS because they are hindering with the mission to stop the terrorists from bombing paris, but in the end the mission actually fails and to my knowledge at least, Dima is dead.

Nintendoftw

#505

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Lol most of the list, if you actually read it, is not fixing glitches... It's improving the gameplay... Unless you call tank rounds not destroying helicopters in one shot a glitch... Or maybe slightly reduced repair speed for vehicles...?

"OMG it's taking way too long to repair this tank, must be a glitch!" rofl. EA was simply replying to fan emails and improving the game as they had asked... Giving you more bang for the buck.

Quake

#506

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw There's still no justification for killing Police. They could have told the Police to not interfere. And your are right about one thing, I wasn't really paying attention the the story. Like you already said, the campaign wasn't very good and they didn't really work that much on it (paraphrase.) So why would I really care about a generic story that was lazily made?

Nintendoftw

#508

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Yes, you seem to continuously whine about things like online play. Consoles, as of this gen, focus more on single player than multiplayer... And the single player games are a heck of a lot better than the average Wii game... I can't even believe that ANYONE who owns an HD console or PC would defend a piece of garbage like the Wii as it is. Rofl, it's like me comparing my 3DS to my gameboy and saying my gameboy is better.. Although it's all down to personal preference, compared to the vast majority of gamers, your preference is... Nasty.

And I saw vast majority of gamers because most people who are truly dedicated to gaming own a PS3/360, not a Wii... When I was younger I loved my Wii. Why? Not because it had good games... Because it was made by Nintendo... Which is most likely the reason you guys are so blind to the truth...

Even Shokio, one of the biggest supporters of the Wii, admitted that even though he considered the Wii his favorite console, he admitted that the PS3 was his BEST console.

Nintendoftw

#509

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake DO you really want me to point out all of the "problems" in some of the Wii games I have? It's going to be a heck of a lot bigger than that, primarily with No More Heroes. The fact that the game is primarily online is of course going to be full of problems, because the range of possibilities is FAR larger than the majority, if not all Wii games.

Nintendoftw

#510

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake So there was no reason for you to have sold it then... TO my understanding I remember you saying you enjoyed BF: Bad Company 2... And BF3 pretty much improves upon that formula..

Quake

#511

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Whether or not my preference is "nasty" as you claim is still an opinion. There is no facts that say it is.

I'd love to see your list of "problems" with No More Heroes, because I know it will be dwarfed by the shadow of all of the problems in the 4 BF3 patches. Also, in BF3 the developers have admitted that there were problems in the game, hence the patch, however, it is very unlikely you'll ever find any "problems" in No More Heroes that the developers have admitted to being problematic, and even if they did find something they wanted to change they couldn't, because the Wii can't update.

How can you say that "Consoles, as of this gen, focus more on single player than multiplayer..." when you've yet to mention many games that have good single player (you would only be able to say this because you own it) relative to the games that have multiplayer?

Quake

#512

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I did enjoy Bad Company 2, but it eventually got boring. Like I said in a post before, the reason I traded in BF3 is because I played it on version 1.03 and experienced numerous glitches that really tainted the experience. Even still, how am I to know that the glitches I encountered have been fixed since I've yet to see locate them in any patch notes?

TrueWiiMaster

#513

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Casual gamers might not care too much about HD graphics, but the Wii U has other features that would DEFINITELY appeal to them. Features like being able to run Netflix on the remote while someone else watches TV, or being able to video chat with just the remote, or using the remote as an e-reader. The ipad may offer many of those options, but it costs hundreds more than the Wii U is likely to cost, and can't play on the TV like the Wii U can. The Wii U is like combining an ipad with a Wii and the power of an HD system (likely more power than anything on the market for the next 2 or more years at least). If you can't see the potential there, I don't think I can help you.

The Wii U is hardly comparable to smart phones in that 1. the screen on its controller is far larger than any smartphone out there (even casual gamers will see that) and 2. it can play on the TV. It's also hard to compare the Vita-PS3 combo to the Wii U because, again, the second screen is much larger on the Wii U. Buying both the Vita and PS3 would also probably cost 1-2 hundred dollars more than the Wii U, and the Wii U will likely be more powerful than the PS3 and have various exclusive features. If you're going to talk about portable to console connectivity, the GBA and Gamecube did that before Sony even had a portable. The Wii U is different because it's a completely different scale. No system has ever had a dedicated controller like the Wii U's. Games featuring portable to console control generally don't rely heavily on that option, because doing so would alienate every would-be customer who owns the console but not the portable. Every Wii U owner, however, will have the Wii U remote, making full use of the second screen feasible for the first time.

"ESPECIALLY since the Wii U's primary controls are literally the same controllers as the Wii." Where did you hear that? All I ever heard was that the Wii U will be compatible with Wiimotes, and make use of them in some games. I never heard any games will exclusively use the Wii remotes, nor did I ever hear that they were being called "the Wii U's primary controls". Besides, I can use a PS2 remote on the PS3 (with an adapter because Sony was cheap). Does that take away from the PS3?

First, where did you learn that 49% was a majority? And second, where did you get that statistic? Thirdly, how do you define "mature" gamers? People who are mature, or people who play only M games?

Mario Kart appeals to everyone, not just kids and casual gamers. Either way, it outsold almost every best-selling game on either HD system, so how can you say Nintendo has no support? And if you seriously think Smash Bros appeals to kids and casual gamers specifically, you are sorely mistaken. I'd say that about Battlefield, COD, Halo, Uncharted, and Gran Turismo (from what I could find, the best selling PS3 exclusive) long before I'd say it about Brawl. Brawl outsold all of those games because there are still that many gamers on the Wii. Certainly some of its sales can be attributed to casual gamers, but the same could be said for almost any game.

"while Microsoft and Sony are gaining more fans than losing" Please compare the PS3's sales to the PS2's sales and tell me which had more fans. Thank you.

"YOU HAVE TO KILL THE POLICE OFFICERS because they are hindering with the mission to stop the terrorists from bombing paris". There's nothing okay about this. Police trying to do their job protecting people from threats being killed because they're in the way is not cool.

Nintendoftw

#515

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake The majority of games I have have great single player and tacked on multiplayer...

  • Dante's Inferno
  • Red Dead Redemption
  • Portal 2
  • Resistance 3
  • Batman Arkham City
  • Soul Calibur IV
  • Dead Space 2
  • Grad Theft Auto IV and it's DLC content Ballad Of Gay Tony
    All amazing games.
Nintendoftw

#517

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster There are none better than Mario.

Although Zelda pretty much started it all, there are a few that are quite equal to Zelda.... FYI the formula for the zelda hasn't changed in a very long time.... For Metroid Prime of course there are none.

Monster Hunter...? Lol I have absolutely no idea why you love that game so much... There are quite a few that kill Monser Hunter in core gameplay... At least that's what I hear... I don't like games remotely similar to it, I hate JRPGs, they are all the same annoying chibi anime style and are even more generic that FPS games... EIther the JRPG will be in the same style as Monster Hunter or Final Fantasy, both which are absolutely awful.

Lol it's funny that you can only name Nintendo exclusives...

Nintendoftw

#518

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Wrong... Although Soul Calibur is fun with a group of friends I said ONLINE play.... And Soul Calibur IV has worst online play than even a lot of Wii games that I have (Eww). And even with multiplayer being good, it is very far from the primary focus.

TrueWiiMaster

#519

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Lol. It's equally funny that you can only name 3rd party exclusives.

"Lol I have absolutely no idea why you love that game so much." You make it sound like I'm the only one, but it scored well almost everywhere. The reason I keep mentioning it is because it's a shining example of an excellent 3rd party Wii exclusive, which you seem to believe don't exist.

If you seriously think Monster Hunter is anime/chibi styled, I have to wonder if you've ever even looked at it. Sure it's stylized, but that doesn't translate to anime/chibi. Even RAGE, perhaps the best looking game this generation, is stylized.

TrueWiiMaster

#520

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
"Although Soul Calibur is fun with a group of friends I said ONLINE play". No, you said right before posting your list the games "have great single player and tacked on multiplayer..." Is Soul Cailbur IV really at its best played alone? That would be pretty weird for a fighter...

Nintendoftw

#521

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster You read my comment wrong. I said most JRPGs are chibi anime styled... And that most JRPG games are either styled as Monster Hunter or FInal Fantasy

Quake

#523

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I can see how games like Date's Inferno, Batman AC and even Dead Space 2 have tacked on multiplayer. However, Resistance 3, Portal 2, Soul Calibur IV and Red Dead Redemption all have multiplayer that is critically acclaimed.

Something also worth noting, why did you buy games that, in your opinion, have tacked on multiplayer if online is such an important part of the HD consoles?

By the way, almost half of the games you mentioned are not HD exclusives, they're also on the PC. Resistance 3 is the only real exclusive because it's only on the PS3. It's funny how 3/7 of the "great" single player games you mentioned are not HD console exclusives...

TrueWiiMaster

#524

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You said, "I hate JRPGs, they are all the same annoying chibi anime style..." I'm pretty sure you're saying Monster Hunter's a JRPG, so how did I misread that?

Nintendoftw

#525

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I'm not debating in defence of HD consoles, but I am debating AGAINST the Wii and using the HD consoles as an example. Don't bother trying to bring the PC into this, because then the Wii would look like an Atari 2600

TrueWiiMaster

#527

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
According to IGN (I just checked) the online multiplayer in Soul Caliber is great, not tacked on. They also said the game has great one player, but I still find it a stretch to say multiplayer was tacked onto a fighter. You might as well say multiplayer was an afterthought in any good racing game.

TrueWiiMaster

#528

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
You said "all". Here's what you said, copied and pasted, "...I hate JRPGs, they are all the same annoying chibi anime style and are even more generic that FPS games." Did you see the word "most" in there anywhere?

Nintendoftw

#529

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Portal 2 has no primary focus, because it is pretty much balanced between single player and multiplayer. Resistance 3's multiplayer is tacked on... I doubt you have it if you think otherwise. Sure multiplayer is fun but it's very far from the primary focus of the game. And although I take consoles over the PC because the PC's games are generic I still think the PC absolutely destroys the Wii...
please make your points without referring to emulation, as it violates our Rules — TBD

Quake

#530

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Well you've yet to prove the Wii worse in any way other than power. And you've yet to provide a number from a legitimate source.

How can PC games be called generic if many of the games are also on the HD consoles? Doesn't that mean that many of the HD console games are generic?

Nintendoftw

#531

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I actually meant PC exclusives... While say the Playstation brand has Little Big Planet, Ratchet And Clank, Jak And Daxter, and many others that just simply aren't found as much anymore, PC has the same old RTS games every generation... I mean PC gaming is fun, VERY fun, but I find console gaming has more variety...

Nintendoftw

#532

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I've already proved that although the Wii has more games than the HD consoles, it has LESS good games... Look at the reviews for reference.

Quake

#533

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Kinda funny. You say that "PC has the same old RTS games every generation..." Really the PC has no generations. Any incremental improvements can only be benchmarked when compared to console generations. The only real generational differences in PC gaming is with engines. Doom 1 compared to Quake 1, very large incremental improvement.

Like I said before, I don't base my purchasing of a game on whether or not it gets a "good" score. Gamespot was the place I would go to to find out what games are "good" based on score. But since they gave Skyward Sword a 7.5 and Skyrim a 9.0 I no longer use them (or any reviews on new games right now.) This is mainly because it's ridiculous to say that Skyrim, the game that corrupts your save data just from playing it, is better than Skyward Sword. Currently I would much rather know if a game has glitches in it than what score a reviewer gave it (since reviewers are also people and peoples opinions differ greatly on things.) But in the end it comes down to preference. If you prefer a game like Skyrim and are willing to take a chance loosing everything (like my friend did) instead of playing a game that was actually tested, then be my guest.

"Good" games are relative to the player, not based on fact.

Nintendoftw

#534

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Yeah, but the patch fixed that.... And plus, STOP USING GLITCHES.... EVERY game has glitches... Twilight Princess dstroyed my save file, does that mean the game was bad? No. BUY skyrim. It is very critically acclaimed and an amazing looking game. Just because someone said Skyward sword is a worst game doesn't mean anything, WHAT IF IT IS? Chances are, taking the Wii's pathetic processing power into consideration, and the fact that it can't run too many enemies on screen, that it COULD be better... I've played Skyward Sword, and I would say it's better than Skyrim, but that's only because I ONLY HAVE one side of the story rather than both

Quake

#535

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Not every game has glitches, we've gone over this already...

Which patch was it in Skyrim that fixed the save data glitch? I can't seem to find it.

So Twilight Princess destroyed your save file? You do know Nintendo offered a fix for that.

The point of my mentioning the review system is purely because you said that "the Wii has more games than the HD consoles, it has LESS good games... Look at the reviews for reference." Reviews have no impact on whether or not a game is "good." You're attacking yourself on this.

Nintendoftw

#537

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Yes, every game that is in 3D and has more than two dimensions HAS GLITCHES. It is near to impossible not to, ESPECIALLY taking into consideration the size of today's games...

Nintendoftw

#538

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake The glitches were that and the game shattering PS3 lag glitch... Rofl look at Skyward Sword, it has game shattering glitches that will never be fixed because of the Wii's terrible online functionality...

Nintendoftw

#539

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Good games are based on opinion, but the fact is that Wii does not appeal to serious gamers... Just little kids, casual gamers, and Nintendo fans (to some extent).

Nintendoftw

#540

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Soul Calibur IV's online play is absolutely terrible... Offline multiplayer is just about as good as has always been, but it is still tacked on in the aspect that the single player has more work put into it...

Nintendoftw

#541

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster That was a typo, and you actually taking it seriously was a purposeful misinterpretation... It was quite obvious that I didn't mean every single JRPG in existence...

Quake

#542

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I'd love to know what "game shattering glitch" in Skyword Sword you're talking about. Because if it's the one where you go a different direction than what they planned you to take, it's been fixed.

Ah, so now you specify and say that "every game that is in 3D and has more than two dimensions HAS GLITCHES." Meaning a game that is not a side scroller or one that plays similarly to the boulder levels in Crash Bandicoot 1. Ever see a glitch in the console versions of RE2? Nope, me either. How about MGS1 on the PS1?

Quake

#543

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Logically, based off of what your saying, that would make me not a serious gamer because the Wii does appeal to me? That would be far from correct or fact I'm afraid.

TrueWiiMaster

#545

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Even if it was a typo, it was not a "purposeful misinterpretation" on my part. It was a mistake on your part if anything. I read what you wrote and responded. I'm not to blame for any misunderstanding there.

"...but the fact is that Wii does not appeal to serious gamers". Unless they actually want to play serious games. The Wii has tons of great games, including some of the most truly hardcore games of this generation. The HD consoles have shooters. First person shooters, third person shooters, over the shoulder shooters. Lots of shooters. The PS3 and 360 appeal most to shooter fans, not "serious gamers". Try not to mix those up.

BTW, did you ever read post #518? I don't think you ever responded to it...

Quake

#549

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I like the PS3 and the Wii. Does the fact I like the PS3 make me a serious gamer but the fact I like the Wii make me not a serious gamer?

By saying that the Wii's appeal is towards "Just little kids, casual gamers, and Nintendo fans (to some extent)" that would mean you are not a Nintendo fan based off of your dislike of the Wii.

Nintendoftw

#550

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Rofl @518

. The majority of the gaming market is casual gamers, and thus since the majority of people who own Wiis are casual gamers, the majority of sales came from casual gamers, not serious gamers.... The same can't be said for a game like Mortal Kombat, because it's an M rated game so kids who are eight years old usually can't get their hands on it, narrowing the crowd down to mostly teenagers and adults... And since adults take up the majority of the gaming industry it's mostly adults who buy the game. And since most adult gamers who buy game systems that are over 250$ are serious gamers, that means most serious gamers go for games like Mortal Kombat. Simple logic...

Although I don't really like Mortal Kombat and would pick Super Smash Bros over any fighting game out right now on any game console, I am still aware of how the current gaming market works... Here are the statistics: http://www.grabstats.com/statcategorymain.asp?StatCatID=13

And this type of logic works for the vast majority of Wii games

Nintendoftw

#551

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Please reread the quote.... Notice "to some extent" -_-. That means NOT ALL NINTENDO FANS.... I've been a Nintendo fan since the N64 era. And I misread the comment, thought it only said MGS. I think you misunderstood what I meant by "glitches"... Does the gun go through the wall when standing too close to it? That's a glitch... Can you step through enemies? That's a glitch... I mean every single detail. Is the audio always in sync with the gameplay?

TrueWiiMaster

#552

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
The problem is there's not much logic at work in your argument.

Where did the number for "the majority of people who own Wiis are casual gamers" come from? I didn't see it on that site. Even if that's true, casual gamers tend to only buy a couple games, or no games at all (they just play the pack-in). They couldn't have supported the huge numbers of sales Nintendo's software has seen.

"And since adults take up the majority of the gaming industry it's mostly adults who buy the game." Why doesn't this apply to the Wii? The majority of console sales across the board go to adults. Why? Because adults have money! They might be buying systems for their kids, themselves, or friends, and them buying it at any cost does not directly relate to how much they actually use it!

"And since most adult gamers who buy game systems that are over 250$ are serious gamers," So anyone who bought the PS3 or 360 for $250 or under isn't a serious gamer? That number is far too specific and totally unfounded. $250 might be far from $600, but it's still a good chunk of change. And by that same logic anyone who bought the PS3 at launch for $600 is automatically a "serious" gamer, even if they bought it purely for the bluray and maybe some Madden every once in awhile.

Let's say that your logic did work, just hypothetically. Your argument is still fatally flawed. Let's assume for a minute that buying systems for over $250 (apparently the magic number) makes you a "serious gamer". Not all, or even most, of those "serious gamers" bought Mortal Kombat! Doesn't that mean that most "serious gamers" go for games unlike Mortal Kombat?

I don't trust the website you posted. First of all, they don't say how they got the information, as in how many people were polled and how diverse the group was. Secondly, some of the statistics seemed completely bizarre (the average gamer is 35 and has been playing for 13 years!? Seriously? 44% of online gamers are female? Then why aren't they almost as common as the guys?). And thirdly, the link stopped working, so I can't even go back to find more examples of how ridiculous it is.

P.S.- Some people payed well over $300 for the Wii when it was hard to find from everyone buying it at the $1-short-of-the-magic-number launch price. Are they "serious gamers"?

Nintendoftw

#553

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster THe website DOES state it's sources... Didn't you click the "more info" next to EACH AND EVERY one of the statistics? Attached were articles discussing the statistic among numerous other things, and I had already heard of the statistic before even knowing about that site anyway, so I believe it is most likely true... And 250$ isn't a magic number, you completely missed the ENTIRE point of the reply. Anyone willing to spend big on a game system obviously isn't looking to let it dust.... And should I resort to the amount of Wii systems connected to the internet...? And remember, by your logic the Wii and PS3 BOTH appeal to the same crowds, so there is no "Well not everyone can connect to the internet"...

And I believe I even have an article on that one.

Quake

#554

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw I take it you've never played RE2 or MGS1, games that have disappearing bodies. RE2 can't have clipping because of the design of the game, and I don't recall MGS1 having any clipping either. Both games have great soundtracks that stay in sync with the gameplay, sound does as well.

If you would type your comments with more clarity then we wouldn't be having these misreadings.

I've been a fan of Nintendo since the NES. If all you can say in response to my comment is that my taste in games is bad, it's quite obvious you're getting desperate.

Nintendoftw

#556

Nintendoftw said:

Here is the survey: http://gonintendo.com/?p=120319

I mean come on...? 54%???

That means the other 46% Don't even bother connecting their Wii systems online... Most likely NOT because they enjoy single player experiences more, but because they don't use the system often enough and don't even want to bother setting up the internet settings... Which brings me back to the fact the the majority of Wii sales go to ****casual games****, kids, and Nintendo fans...

Although the point may be a bit flawed, Wii functions such as Virtual console would DEFINITELY press Nintendo fans to connect to the internet anyway.

Quake

#559

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Walk through or walk over? It can go either way. It's not like you can comment on this anyway because you don't own the games.

theblackdragonAdmin

#561

theblackdragon said:

Guys, the piracy portion of this discussion is absolutely irrelevant to the topic at hand, thus I've edited it from your comments. discussion of piracy and emulation stands in violation of the Community Rules. Please stop bringing it up; find other ways to argue your points here at Nintendo Life.

Nintendoftw

#562

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I can't comment on something that is OBSERVABLE in the game? That's like saying that I can't comment on Crysis 2's graphics because I don't have it.

Nintendoftw

#564

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake Even so what exactly would make you feel so bad about killing a virtual cop in GTA IV? I mean considering that they are able to kill you too, and it's just for a pure challenge to see how long you would last, why would you have a problem with that...? Are you a cop? Because I have relatives that are cops, and I don't think of them when I kill a cop in GTA IV

TrueWiiMaster

#565

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
I tried, but the "more info" buttons wouldn't work. They all led to a broken page. As does the link you posted now. It worked at first, but now it won't take me anywhere.

Some people really did buy the PS3 at $600 for use of the bluray player more than for gaming, and no matter what they payed, they may or may not have played the system much. Some of the systems were given as gifts and others were sold to stores like Gamestop used. Also, many people bought their PS3's and 360's for $150-300 (I saw 360's on sale at one point for $150 as they tried to clear stock for the slim models). How much did you pay for your PS3? If you've only had it about a year, I'd expect around $300, not too much more than I payed for my Wii.

According to the website you posted, since you trust it, close to 80% (as I recall; I still can't use the link) of console owners were connected to the internet. In fact, it said 75% of console owners use a video service on their console at least a couple times a week. Anyway, according to the site there are 190 million console owners in America, so even if all 20% of those players not connected to the internet were Wii owners (and I'm pretty sure that's not the case) that would amount to 38 million Wii owners not online, leaving about 57 million Wii users connected. That's only 5 million fewer than total PS3 sales and 9 million short of total 360 sales. That certainly sounds like the HD consoles have the advantage, if only a little, but don't forget to include in those numbers the fact that many fans bought the newer models of the 360 and/or PS3, while few people have bought multiple Wiis for themselves (as in generally 1 Wii per customer). It might not include everyone, but I'd definitely say people buying the systems a second time (or in 360's case a 3rd or 4th time) accounted for millions of sales. Even after absorbing every unconnected device the Wii can still compete, and win, in numbers of online devices.

Being a grown man is totally irrelevant to being okay with killing innocent (and living; zombies are dead aren't they?) police in a game. I, and evidently Quake, respect police and what they do enough to not want to kill them for fun, even if it relates to the story of a game.

Nintendoftw

#566

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster The fact that you keep saying "killing innocent people" is troubling... I think you take video games a bit TOO seriously lol...

You aren't killing innocent people... You're killing bots... And technically you aren't even killing them because they always respawn... And cop killing isn't even related to the story in GTA IV. Cop killing is for the challenge, obviously you haven't played any Grand Theft Auto game... Because if you did you would know just how fun "killing people" is in that particular game... And plus if you want to talk about killing the innocent... What about YOU killing aliens in Metroid Prime? What about YOU killing soldiers in war games? What about YOU killing zombies in horror games...? Being innocent is relative to the observer, so nothing deserves to die. They are ALL the exact same things, bots. Nothing more, nothing less.... They have no consciousness, they have no brain, they have no life. They are randomly spawned bots that take on civilian form. It seems both you and Quake don't look at things for what they actually are... You should start doing that, it helps with plenty of things.

Nintendoftw

#567

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Yeah I do understand how the Wii's number of online players can win in numbers, but it's really the percents that matter.

And nice pick up on that statistics site, But i have heard the statistic on the age of the average gamer, and it is somewhat correct. The point really is that the average age of a gamer is not 12, kids don't play as big as a role in the gaming industry as most seem to think.

theblackdragonAdmin

#568

theblackdragon said:

@Nintendoftw #567: wait-wait-wait, I'm confused now — this from the guy who was previously getting on people's cases for not having played enough games on PS3 or 360 to be able to say anything about those games or make any sort of valid judgments? If they're not allowed to watch videos on YouTube and make a call, why are you allowed to?

Quake

#569

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw It seems that you obviously don't respect Police as much as TrueWiiMaster and I do, because if you did then you'd would be against the mutilation or harm of Police in any form, real-life or even the pretend killing you love so much.

TrueWiiMaster

#571

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
"And cop killing isn't even related to the story in GTA IV" For that I was referring to the story of Battlefield 3.

"Cop killing is for the challenge". So it's sport, then, to kill virtual cops as a virtual criminal?

In Metroid Prime you kill animals and aliens out to take over the galaxy, or universe, or something...
Killing in war is VERY different from killing cops on the street. For one thing, it is a soldier's job to kill enemies, whichever side you're on. A cop's job is not to kill but to protect.
Again, aren't Zombies the living dead? They're already dead. They're moving corpses. Monsters.

"They are randomly spawned bots that take on civilian form" And if we would rather not kill bots dressed and acting as police, that's up to us. Cops in video games may just be chunks of data, but they represent real cops. Killing them represents killing cops. If it didn't matter that they happen to be dressed in uniform, why dress them in uniform? Because they are supposed to be cops. When you kill them, you are killing bots representing police.

Average age doesn't mean most gamers are that age. According to your site, about a quarter of gamers are under 18, about a quarter of gamers are over 50, and about half of gamers are between 18 and 50. A few gamers in their 70s could really throw off the average. I'm also curious about where they got the information. Did they really talk to enough kids as compared to adults? And are the results even useable when some adults consider themselves gamers for playing sudoku on their phone? There are a lot of variables here.

@TBD
THANK YOU!

Nintendoftw

#572

Nintendoftw said:

@theblackdragon Glitches are observable... I watch a youtube walkthrough, see a car fly into the air for no reason, I can assume the game has glitches. Same with graphics. Certain things can be said, be I can't comment on the gameplay because I have never played it. And even if I have played it and don't own it, I STILL can't make a full observation. Unless I own the game and have had actual time with it... Now renting a game and beating the entire game within a matter of days is another thing.

Nintendoftw

#573

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I respect police officers, but killing virtual police officers has absolutely NO affect on my actual respect for REAL police officers... Real police officers and bots are two COMPLETELY different things, they aren't even comparable.

TrueWiiMaster

#574

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Oh, and why is it "the percents that matter"? If the Wii has as many "serious" gamers as either HD console, why should it matter that it also has a bunch of casual gamers? If the same number of real gamers like each system, neither has the advantage of being more popular with real gamers.

TrueWiiMaster

#575

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Youtube videos aren't always, or even frequently, from the, erhem, official versions of the game. As such they aren't always representative of actual gameplay, particularly when it comes to glitches.

Nintendoftw

#576

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster A soldier's job is to protect, even more so than a cop, because they protect you from international affairs... Each soldier is fighting to defend their country, so killing them is not justified... If your a soldier killing another soldier, it's just as wrong as a criminal killing a cop, there is no such thing as good or bad, that's a delusion of the mind. The criminal believes he is killing for something good, and the cop believes he is killing for something good... Same scenario. But of course since for the most part criminals are fighting against me and cops for me, I have deep respect for cops over criminals any day... Morality is relative to the person, there is no absolute right or wrong.

Nintendoftw

#577

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Yes, it's still possible. Real gamers might own multiple systems and once and prefer to play on the HD system because the games are more complex and have more to them (This is actually true for a lot of HD games, compared to the Wii). This has nothing to do with difficulty, but with the complexity of the game.

Quake

#578

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Like I said in a previous post, you can't change my thoughts on this topic. I figured that mentioning the killing of Police would end up stirring up some degree of conversation about morals, but I figured, eh, why not? It's not like the context I'm mentioning Police killing in has no relevance to the topic, but now that your basically going into religion territory ("no absolute right or wrong") you're completely off topic for this board.

TrueWiiMaster

#580

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Though it is the military's job to defend the country as a whole, it is not the military's job to protect individual people. In war, which is what you said earlier, a soldier's job is not to protect but to defend. There IS a difference. By defending the country the soldier must destroy the enemy, at least until they surrender. A police rarely has to go this far, as they aren't focused on killing the enemy so much as protecting the would-be victims. In a war game you kill soldiers as an opposing soldier, each risking your life to defend. In cop-killing games you kill police trying to uphold the law, oftentimes as a criminal.

Quake

#581

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Neglecting the words "aren't always" I see. Some of the Youtube videos you can see are legitimate, others... Not so much.

TrueWiiMaster

#582

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Or they might prefer to play the Wii games because they're more fun, more challenging, more varied, and often offer as much depth as almost any game out there.

"So you're saying that gameplay video of "Skyrim for PS3" posted by IGN wasn't the official version?" Wow. And you accused me of purposefully misreading your comment earlier? I never said every video on youtube was fake. I said that many are, not all. IGN's pretty official. Feel free to post glitch videos from IGN!

Nintendoftw

#584

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Police officers still sometimes have to do it. Usually if someone dos not comply, the police have to use force, pepper spray, tasers, anything to get the criminal to surrender... Sound familiar? And in GTA IV you kill officers that are corrupt, and it is optional for you to kill a cop on the street...

I see that you look at GTA IV as harmful because of the fact that it SIMULATES killing people... Oh okay, so what about No More Heroes? I mean you are killing plenty of people, so what is so different about it? And lol it's even more violent in terms of bloodshed than GTA IV. I can't slice someone head off or slice through their body in GTA IV.

Quake

#585

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw No, he said "Youtube Videos aren't always, or even frequently,..." Somehow you got "aren't frequently," which means you skipped 3 words.

Nintendoftw

#586

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Wii games aren't more fun, more challenging, or varied... The majority of the Wii's games are for little kids and casual gamers. And as for depth? I CANNOT TELL YOU JUST HOW WRONG YOU ARE rofl.

Depth? Really? Out of anything else? Depth? How the hell could a game with PS2 graphics, outdated gameplay, and a horrible physics engine be more immersive

TrueWiiMaster

#587

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Except lethal force for a police is a last resort, and for a soldier it's the plan of action.

Wrong. I was more specific. I said I didn't like killing virtual cops. Nowhere did I say I was against GTA for its general violence. NMH is indeed very violent. That's a big part of why I don't have it. I find no entertainment in slicing someone up and watching their blood spray like a fountain. But what relevance did it have anyway? Trying to circumvent the discussion?

Nintendoftw

#588

Nintendoftw said:

@Quake I think you read it wrong yourself. "Aren't always, or even frequently..." Means that he means that they aren't frequent.

Nintendoftw

#589

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster So the fact that you enjoy killing just about everything in a video game BUT a human means that you don't like violent video games?

You do know the majority of video games involves killing something... Right?

TrueWiiMaster

#590

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Your opinion. The majority of good Wii games target no specific age group, and certainly aren't made for casual gamers. "And as for depth? I CANNOT TELL YOU JUST HOW WRONG YOU ARE rofl." Right back at ya.

Gameplay doesn't rely on power whatsoever. I don't know what you mean by physics exactly, since I've had no problem with physics on the Wii. And graphics can only add so much. They are far, far from being the most important thing in a game, and add very little real depth. Actually, it could be said saying graphics are important to making a game deep is very shallow thinking.

Nintendoftw

#591

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Wrong. Graphics contribute A LOT to the depth of the game.... I don't think you have a good understanding of what it is for a game to be immersive. And I think you undermine graphics, because they are just as important as gameplay... Without graphics what exactly would you be playing??? There would be nothing on screen.

TrueWiiMaster

#593

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Maybe saying "frequently" was too much. But still, youtube videos, if not from a verified reliable source, are a worse resource than wikipedia.

"...but what I did wrong is assumed that you had No More Heroes because it was a critically acclaimed game." Hey, that didn't keep you from skipping Monster Hunter!

Ah, using that old plan huh? Are you going to tell me it's just as cruel to stomp on goombas as shooting a cop next? I don't generally count fictional creatures on the same level as virtual humans, just like I don't place animals on the same level as humans in the real world.

Like I said before, I enjoy COD every once in a while. You keep putting words in my mouth. "So the fact that you enjoy killing just about everything in a video game BUT a human means that you don't like violent video games?" When was that "fact" established? I said I don't like extreme violence, blood, or gore, or police killing. That hardly means I abhor all violence in video games.

Nintendoftw

#594

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Why not place animals on the same level as humans? Humans are animals, we are nothing more than an ape that evolved to be more intelligent than other primates... How does that makes humans worth the most in the animal kingdom?

Police killing is the same as killing animals in Red Dead Redemption. And without making real world comparisons, how exactly would killing a virtual police officer be worse than killing a virtual alien?

TrueWiiMaster

#596

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
There you go again, purposefully misreading my post. Obviously, from the context, I was referring to graphics of the Wii versus graphics of the HD consoles. A truly immersive game pulls you in with gameplay and character, not looks. People can get immersed in a puzzle game, for instance, even if it uses NES graphics. RPGs in particular can be very immersive, even with graphics 2 or 3 generations old. Or how about Ocarina of Time for example. Isn't it still immersive? Saying graphics add depth to a game is like saying new clothes add depth to a person.

It would be pretty hard to compare two great games with completely different gameplay, so I won't. Graphics have nothing to do with it.

Nintendoftw

#597

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster And gameplay doesn't rely on power? Oh okay, I believe you bro trust me.

Now tell me more about how the SNES has better playing games than the Gamecube again. Also please explain how the gamecube;s horsepower has absolutely no affect on it's games.

TrueWiiMaster

#598

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Your beliefs, not mine. I'm here to discuss games, not man's origins. I do that elsewhere, when I feel like dealing with even more flawed and stubborn logic than what you use to judge games.

I never played the campaign of MW2, so I never saw or did that. Thanks for the tip in case the game gets released in a bundle for my first HD system.

Nintendoftw

#599

Nintendoftw said:

@TrueWiiMaster Nope... When you get immersed into a game you feel like you are the character, makes you not want to die in the heat of battle. Ocarina Of Time is still immersive, but not as immersive as Skyward sword... The environments look less realistic and you don't get as pulled in and feel like a real young adventurer like you might in Skyward Sword.

Oh and please tell me about how Super Mario 64 destroys Super Mario Galaxy 2 in gameplay.. How much of a larger game it is than Galaxy, and how the beautiful environments in Super Mario Galaxy don't contribute to the experience.

I would love you know

Graphics ad depth because they add REALISM... They make you feel as if you are actually there.

TrueWiiMaster

#601

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Okay. The SNES had some of the best platformers ever made in Super Mario World and Donkey Kong Country 1,2, and 3. It also had some of the best RPGs ever made in Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy IV (not sure if that's the original number; the switch-up always confuses me), Dragon Quest 4,5, and 6, Earthbound, Super Mario RPG, and others I'm not too familiar with. Nintendo's second console also had perhaps the best 2D Zelda ever made (which pretty much translates to the best 2D adventure game ever made), and had its fair share of great fighters too. And let's not forget the acclaimed Super Metroid and Starfox's first appearance.

With all these great games the SNES could easily be considered Nintendo's best system ever, though I still like the Gamecube and Wii just as much.

theblackdragonAdmin

#602

theblackdragon said:

That's it — I'm tired of editing insults out of comments. I've already banned one person for it tonight, please don't make me ban the rest of you. Thanks in advance! :3

Quake

#603

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw "Youtube videos aren't always, or even frequently, from the, erhem, official versions of the game." "Videos" is the subject, "are" is the verb, "not" (n't) modifies the verb "are" and is an adverb. "Always" is also an adverb that modifies the adverb "not" (n't.) "Or" is a coordinating conjunction that joins the phrase "even frequently" to the rest of the sentence. "Frequently" is an adverb which modifies the the adverb "even." "From" begins the prepositional phrase. Ah, I see it, you're correct. You cut out two of the adverbs making the remaining two adverbs modify each other, which makes sense.

TrueWiiMaster

#604

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Nintendoftw
Anyway, comparing Mario 64 to Galaxy is a little unfair, not for graphics or power, but for experience. Mario 64 is the world's first console 3D platformer. Of course gameplay will be smoother on the 4th try (not counting Luigi's Mansion or any of the numerous non-Mario 3D Nintendo games between Mario 64 and Galaxy 2) than on the 1st try. That difference is from developer experience, not power.

And as I said, graphics add little, not nothing. Galaxy's lush environments are fun to look at and play through, but climbing the mountain to fight the bob-omb king in Mario 64 is still fun too. Apply your logic to other media. Is a great movie worse if it's not in HD? Maybe a little, but it's still great. The same goes for games. Great graphics add a little, but a game lives and dies on its gameplay.

And actually, I think Mario 64 takes longer than Galaxy. It may not have as many levels, but it has plenty of missions.

Quake

#605

Quake said:

@Nintendoftw Yeah I've played that level in MW2. Didn't benefit the story at all and there really wasn't a purpose to it other than to sadistically slaughter the numerous bot citizens. Made a great multiplayer level, though.

Alucard83

#606

Alucard83 said:

Of course it's weaker than ps3 or xbox 360! Do you really believe that they will spend that much money for their systems? They asked already for a WII too much money for a system that was weaker than the first xbox system! That's a fact! I will not buy the new WII. I'm skipping this one and will focus on xbox 720 or ps4. At least they can deliver new technique while Nintendo will stay behind. Nintendo eat... you know what!

Alucard83

#607

Alucard83 said:

@Joshers744 Nintendo sucks period! In the past they had good games yeah! The Wii is good for a 5 year old. It doesn't offer for an older player anything except the old nes/snes games that are downloadable on the system. That's it! Further it's a crap system. The new games will be made for the same power of ps4 and xbox 720. Do you really believe they will downscale everything just to release it on WII system?

Hokori

#608

Hokori said:

Graphics mean so much, I think I'll make e.t. For ps4 and it'll be the best game ever.
But seriously graphics don't mean a thing, all 45 of my wii games are fun and hardcore

TrueWiiMaster

#609

TrueWiiMaster said:

@Boy8319
"At least they can deliver new technique while Nintendo will stay behind."
Are you serious? All Microsoft and Sony did was improve the power and online of their latest systems. That's hardly a "new technique".

"The Wii is good for a 5 year old. It doesn't offer for an older player anything except the old nes/snes games that are downloadable on the system."
I've played the Wii with a five year old. Many of the best games on the Wii are too hard for him, including Donkey Kong and Mario Galaxy. Others, like Kirby and New Super Mario, would be too hard without help. In other words, you're wrong.

"The new games will be made for the same power of ps4 and xbox 720."
You do realize that, even if those two are way more powerful than the Wii U, they're years away, right? The Wii U will almost definitely be the top dog power-wise for 2-3 years. Are you saying developers won't put their games on the PS3 and 360 during that time? I mean, they WILL be weaker after all. "Do you really believe they will downscale everything just to release it on..." the PS3 and 360?

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...