Wii owners continue to fund Ubisoft's HD games

[o_O.Q]

Final-Fan said:

o_O.Q, I'm appalled that you think publishers are doing a SERVICE to Wii gamers by "experimenting" on them with games like Soul Calibur Legends. Do you think it's sheer coincidence that whenever 360/PS3 get a big name game, and the Wii gets a version that's a totally different type of game, the latter game is the one that's a piece of trash?

Why don't the PS3 and 360 get these types of "experiments"? Because they care about those audiences, and not the Wii gamers. Do you deny it?

"soul calibur legends shows developer negligence is uncalled for." Quite the opposite: SCL was a slap in the face. I played it. Have you?

...
"if someone wanted classic soul calibur theres the HD twins if they wanted something new theres the wii version"
"its funny that people demand that devs try new things in games or games will get stale and boring but when devs actually try it you find people protesting"
"the point of the wii was to open up new forms of gameplay which they attempted"

You've brought this topic up in one form or another in just about every single one of your last 20 posts or so, and I have to say it smells to me like a desperate attempt to redirect the discussion.

(I recall that your very first post in this thread was about how publishers developed for Nintendo "similarly to how they develope for 360 and ps3", and now you seem to be arguing the EXACT OPPOSITE. Curious. And you then said that the Wii gets good and bad games "just like the PS2", hmm, I don't recall the PS2 getting weird, inevitably crappy spinoffs of every major franchise. Oh well.)

Where was I? Oh yes, you say developers do respect the Wii, it's just that it's so weak it can't be ported to, so they experiment on it, which we should be happy for because we complain about too much of the same old same old, right? (And Soul Calibur Legends was treated just as seriously as Mario Galaxy by its developers, I think you said, but I'll assume that was your trained monkey slapping the keyboard while you looked away.)

Again, this is ridiculous. The PSP got a "traditional" version of Soul Calibur. It certainly wasn't any less handicapped in its hardware than the Wii. The Wii controller, with Nunchuk, has a better analog stick and more buttons. (I assume even you wouldn't dispute the Wii is more powerful.) So: why was the Wii singled out for the weird experimental version? Couldn't it have gotten what the PSP did instead, or as well?

Your argument, if I can call it that, of "lol I thought you wanted new stuff?" falls apart when it's ONLY the Wii getting these and they're almost ALWAYS trash. This isn't taking the industry in a new direction. It's disrespecting the Wii audience. And the fact that you can't see that may be why Rol figures you disrespect them too.

"I'm appalled that you think publishers are doing a SERVICE to Wii gamers"

no not just wii gamers... but gaming as a whole... because of nintendos efforts with the wii motion control is now seen as a more viable gaming option than it was before companies like datasoft and mattel and even sony ( eyetoy ) attempted to push motion in gaming before but it never took off like it has now

"Why don't the PS3 and 360 get these types of "experiments"?"

thats not entirely tue... i'll give you a few examples - the ps eye for ps3 and kinect for 360 can be seen as experimenting but the difference here of course is that sony and microsoft made their consoles far more versatile and focused on conventional gameplay primarily unlike nintendo

"your very first post in this thread was about how publishers developed for Nintendo "similarly to how they develope for 360 and ps3""

what i said : "you mean other than the games developed for nintendo platforms? similarly to how they develope for 360 and ps3?"

i'm not sure how you misinterpreted that but i'll clarify - my only point there was that devs develope for all 3 platforms... that was all

 

"And Soul Calibur Legends was treated just as seriously as Mario Galaxy by its developers"

nope at this point i'm kind of realising that just like rolstoppable you love to put words in my mouth this is what was said :

"3. "A true gamer rejects the bastardization of a beloved series"

what makes mario galaxy any less of a bastardisation? because it was successful? because you say so? "

my point is obviously that mario galaxy regardless of being a better game or not is a step away from how 3d mario was usually played just like soul calibur, devs took the motion aspect of the console and tried to incorporate it making it a bastardisation to how the original game was played as rol said

"Again, this is ridiculous. The PSP got a "traditional" version of Soul Calibur"

true valid point but you still don't get it... the psp was always built with conventional controls in mind, however on the other hand the wii from the beginning was mean't to be unconventional 

 

"why was the Wii singled out for the weird experimental version?"

again i addressed this point above 

 

my bottomline here is that wii owners should never have expected conventional experiences from a console that was never intended to be a conventional console, at some point compromises must be made