| stof said: @ Megaman and Happy Squirrel There's nothing wrong with having basic quality requirements for developing a game. For instance, I yanked the following games off of IGN's Wii review section of games with a score between 1 and 1.9. A collection of glitchy, short N64 graphic featuring games of the same level as E.T. Console manufacturers developed standards for licensing to stop games like E.T. At first I figured Nintendo dropped any requirements simply on the "any third party development is good news" angle, but the Wii's successful enough now that this need not be the case. If I developed a tic tac toe game that didn't have any X's in it, Nintendo definitely wouldn't allow that game to be sold on their console. Most of these games are barely, BARELY any better than that. IT's just my theory that so many of these games are hurting the sales of other unkown but good games, but regardless, these games aren't exactly helping. SPOGS Racing Jenga: World Tour Alvin and the Chipmunks Ninjabread Man Action Myth Makers: Trixie in Toyland Mini Desktop Racing Balls of Fury Backyard Baseball '09 Kidz Sports: International Soccer London Taxi: Rush Hour Kidz Sports: Basketball Kidz Sports: Ice Hockey Monster Trux Arenas -- Special Edition Offroad Extreme -- Special Edition |
I don't fully disagree, I just don't think that all third parties really would trust Nintendo (or Sony or Microsoft) to determine what is a "Quality" game in a fair way; and decisions they make might have a negative impact on the sales of some popular (although "Bad") games like Game-Party.
In general, I just think that it is a better approach to inform people that there are really great games out there that they may have overlooked ... Putting Zack and Wiki, Boom Blox and No More Heroes on a "Hidden Gems" display might not turn them into multi-million selling hits, but they will probably sell 10,000+ units a week (worldwide) until they're taken off of that display.
