ChronotriggerJM said:
Biggerboat said:
Bodhesatva said:
I don't think it's the devs, exactly, I think it's the "hardcore" gamers. "Hardcore" gamers are the loud minority: it's a truth I began to understand from playing MMOs. 80 percent of the people are fine with easier, simpler stuff, but the 20 percent who plays constantly are also the 20 percent who post on forums and make requests constantly, and they demand harder, faster, more competitive content. It takes a particularly savvy company to realize that this loud 20 percent doesn't represent the much more sedate 80 percent. I honestly believe that "hardcore" gamers may lead themselves to economic ruin if they persist, or if some companies don't wise up and realize that the economic opportunities presented are rapidly being outpaced by production costs. It's not sustainable: there's strong evidence that the number of people interested in "hardcore" games isn't growing very fast, but the cost to make these games has doubled in the last 5 years. Why is this relatively small group being catered to so luxuriously? Because they've been around for a long time, have proven profitable in the past, and are very, very loud. Again, I only blame the devs in so far as they are unable to see that the people who go on message boards and in forums and write letters requesting high end games with extreme graphics and AI are only a small portion of gamers, and that many if not most are fine with Wii Sports or Guitar Hero. |
Spot on, couldn't agree more. I do hope though that devs are also listening when Portal gets more forum love than it's undoubtedly more expensive and ,I'd hazard a guess, graphics-focussed Orange Box companions. I also hope they look at how SMG is being almost universally adored and the fact it probably cost a good deal less than HS & Lair, an absolutely horrifying thought. In fact I think that SMG should be the poster child for the point I'm trying to make, how do you think N split it's budget between visuals and level design, controls, content etc.? |
But most sites agree that Galaxy is also one of the "best looking games on the wii." Plus mario Galaxy takes a tried and true formula and delivers more of the same. Which isn't bad, but if the franchise is popular, the popularity generally follows suit. I'm not saying galaxy is un-original or anything!!! But when I tried the demo it fealt like I was playing mario 64 with gravity and small planets :D. To me the leap between 64 and galax was physic's and graphics. |
That's why I almost see Wii's graphical limitations as an advantage, it isn't going to break the bank to max it out. I don't have a problem with games looking good, I have a problem with them being the main drain on a game's resources.
I also think painting Galaxy as SM64 with gravity and graphics is oversimplifying things. The amount of work put into the game's design including the gravity aspects should not be underestimated, the game does a lot that it's predecessors don't. I do give SM64 credit though for still being a game which stands up today but then it was made with the same philosophy as SMG, gameplay>>>>>graphics.
