| jimmay said: What you wrote makes no sense, it's a simple fact you can't hold the wii to different a different lower standard than the x360 and ps3 in terms of games and at the same time compare it's sales. Either you compare everything or compare nothing at all. If a game is short, shallow, has limited options, no online, poor a.i., bad graphics, bad sound with hit and miss controls then it's a bad game. Just because their is a casual crowd of people with poor taste in games who like short, shallow and easy, who don't care that it has limited options, no online, poor a.i., bad graphics, bad sound and hit and miss controls doesn't change the fact that it is still bad game. A poor game which is aimed at casual people with poor taste doesn't suddenly turn into a good one just because it met it's goal of being a bad game. |
So the Beatles were an awful band because their muscianship was far below the quality level you would expect from a muscian in a PhilHarmonic Orchestra?
This isn't about the Wii! The fact that you see it that way demonstrates how blinded you are by your fanboy bias. By your standard the AI in a chess program that can challenge a world champion would be 'Poor AI' because it is not a first person shooter; and graphics that are perfect for a puzzle game would be 'Bad Graphics' because it doesn't involve an immersive 3D world.
This has nothing to do with giving games that are low quality high scores; this is about different genres having different things that are important to gameplay. You have yet to make a single argument against this, every post of yours has boiled down to "Wii games suck! They don't deserve higher scores!"
Once again, this has nothing to do with the Wii ... What is so wrong about reviewing a game based on what is important within its genre? If a game has good graphics, AI, music and plays well why should it be doomed to get a 7/10 because it is a party game? You may think a party game is shallow, other people will differ, why shouldn't a party games score relate to how good of a party game it is rather than it being a reflection of deep of gameplay it offers by your standard? If it is the best party game on the market to date should its reviews reflect that?
