Torillian said:
dunno001 said:
Torillian said:
adsl said:
I enjoyed Final Fantasy Crystal Bearers too and it deserves a better reviews. Since it is a Wii game the reviewers just don't like it.
Wii has already a very strong and diverse library, unique titles like FFCB, RS2, NMH2 and Just Dance keep coming, but you know that they will have bad reviews only because they aren't hd titles...
|
And all those pages and pages that reviewers wrote about the game as to why they thought it deserved the score they gave? Was that all just a front so they could mask their bias? What a bunch of BS. |
Actually, yes, it is a front. They always compare it to what "could have been" (or in their eyes, "should" have been) on the PS3 or 360. Since the graphics aren't as good, they dock it points right there. Add in quite a few of them who whine about "the waggle", others whining about the "casualness" of its games, and the ones that just in general don't like Nintendo, and they'll skew the words however they can to trash a Wii game.
What they are not doing is reviewing for the people who care about the game. They're reviewing based on where they want to see gaming go, ie, a stagnant and slowly shrinking red ocean. Yes, there's the occasional blockbuster that makes gaming seem larger than ever, but in general, games are not selling as well as developers need, and they're going out of business as a result. But the Wii requires companies to shift how they do things- "they" meaning publishers, developers, and yes, reviewers. Rather than do that, they'll slight the Wii, trashtalk it, do what they can in hopes that someone picks up on this and decides to not get a Wii, getting something else instead. It becomes another person that they can sell the same old tricks to. All because they just don't want to change.
EDIT IN REPLY TO POST ABOVE THIS: You mention some Nintendo games as getting high scores. I'll counter that by referencing my first line- what could be on the HD systems. They know that Nintendo won't make a game for someone else. So they can't compare it to something else, and actually have to review it based on its merits. This results in the higher scores, and, for Nintendo's better games, also allows them to help perpetuate the "belief" that only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems, and that "we can't compete with Nintendo." Get the smaller guys to give up, go HD, and keep fueling what they want. Gotta take some lumps to get what you want; giving Nintendo's own games good scores, while usually deserving, is the easiest, and feeds another slight. |
And what about Cave Story, Little King's Story, NMH2, World of Goo? Did reviewers just not want those on HD consoles so they gave them undeservingly high scores for no reason?
Disagreeing with reviews is natural, everyone has their view on things and it makes complete sense not to take reviews as gospel. On the other hand, believing that there's some anti-Wii conspiracy to try and take it down is just borderline insane. |
Those games you gave as examples? Cave Story and World of Goo are both WiiWare. I've never claimed that DL games aren't judged fairly, I guess it was my bad in not clarifying that by "Wii game", I reference retail releases. I think that WW, XBLA and PSN releases seem to be judged more fairly and evenly. As for LKS, well, just look at the graphics. It's "kiddy." That's not what we want to see with gaming. And it ties in well to the "kiddy" audience of the Wii. So we'll review it for the kids. And NMH2 got a better review to hype the series for the remake of NMH1 coming to HD. Can't be trashing a series that we're going to be getting, after all. Make it seem good, and get a port for ourselves.
On the second part, yes, I knew some people would disagree with me, such is the nature of opinions. But I don't think it's "borderline insane" as you call it. Shanobi's post actually says some of what I think. Way back in the day, before the internet was big, we had to rely on magazines for information. They knew that gaming was expensive, and that we wanted the good games. So all games got fair, and truthfully, more harsh, reviews. (I still remember Nintendo Power giving Superman 64 a 1.9/5.) But then things took off, and more money and readers from the internet came. It became a case of catering to the readers and advertisers. Since the first to sites were the "hardcore" gamers, they were pandered to. And as things grew, the "professional" gaming media latched onto the "hardcore" mentality. It fed to their readers, the very ones paying the bills. No longer was it a case of honesty, it's a case of keeping the money coming in, journalistic integrity be damned.
