What do you think Dead Rising Wii should've been?

[LordTheNightKnight]

"It really shows that they did not put any effort in the game."

Wrong. They remade every asset for the Wii. Every asset. Just because the zombie count isn't as high (but it's only truly low in the early missions) and just because it doesn't have all the graphical bells and whistles (which were not that much on the 360 version either) does not mean this was something easy or cheap to do.

And I have a problem with this thread. It's basically saying that the entire value of a game is being specifically made for a system, not about the actual substance of the game. By that logic, Contra sucks because it was made for the arcade first. It wasn't made for the NES, and even has loads of flicker with all the bullets flying. Clearly they did a horrible job, and should have done the whole game over for the system.

Do you realize porting has been done with less powerful systems since the days of Atari and Commodore?

Capcom promised to put Dead Rising on the Wii. They didn't promise to do the entire game over. And if it was, I know you all would have complained about that.

You don't have to like the game, but the basing for this thread is still BS. It's not like Chrono Cross, where Square promised a direct sequel, and still made piss poor connections with Trigger. Capcom delivered what they promised.

And before anyone goes "they promised 100 zombies on screen", they said they were shooting for that. And we just know the groups are smaller than that, not that 100 won't fit (enemy corralling, anyone).

EDIT: I'm not saying the game's any good. If you find the gameplay is not to your tastes, you don't have to like it. If you think it's more fun mowing down hordes from the beginning, you don't have to like it.

But criticising it for things not true (little effort to make, Capcom being obligated to do the entire game over) is just being pig-headed.