disolitude said:
So Sonic and Black Knight is worth full price while Sonic Unleashed isn't? Well Sonic Unleashed is a better game no matter how you slice it... |
I don't recall stating that a game being exclusive was the only quality I measured. (also who pays full price for a Sonic game anymore?)
However, PC and Wii are unique in that if they're not exclusive, they almost always suffer in some important way.
Like if I see PC/360/PS3 I know I'll be playing a game with teeny tiny maps, crappy control options, DLC, and other things that scream "this was made for a console". Read that as "this is a gimp PC experience"
If I see a game for Wii/360/PS3 I know the graphics were based around PS360 instead of someone doing something interesting with the art and design, which means the Wii suffers more than it would otherwise. This also means the control was an afterthought instead of a central concern. There will be DLC later for the game, which won't be on the Wii. Awesome, so basically that means they sold an incomplete game and not only is it incomplete but the Wii will never see that DLC anyway.
It's not an issue of some kind of bitter anger over console exclusivity (I own a PS3 anyway), but quality is a very real concern if you're buying for the PC or Wii. I was interested in it as I have a soft spot for MK ripoffs, but reading up on it and watching a lot of reviews and impressions does tell me the Wii is the weakest console version. I see no reason why I should pay full price for a clone of MK with (from what I've read) worse online and worse controls and, to top it all off, is the worst of the console versions of the game.
3rd Party Wall of Shame
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/forums/index.php?topic=30478.msg581036#msg581036