Wii owners continue to fund Ubisoft's HD games

[Final-Fan]

o_O.Q said:

Final-Fan said:

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"
1.  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"?"
2.  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?"
3.  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 :
"A true gamer rejects the bastardization of a beloved series" (Rol)
"what makes mario galaxy any less of a bastardisation? because it was successful? because you say so?"
4.  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"
5.  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?"
6.  again i addressed this point above

1.  That completely failed to address my argument.  I mean, completely.  Absolutely no part of it was relevant to what I said. 

2.  That is totally off point.  You talked about hardware; I had talked about software. 

3.  OK, in that case, why would you say that?  It makes no sense.  The OP talked about a game Ubisoft made for the Wii.  How could you possibly think pointing out that Ubisoft makes games for the Wii is anything but asinine?  That is why I misinterpreted you.  Therefore I thought you were claiming they put forth similar efforts in developing for the Wii vs. PS3 or 360. 

4.  I think you and I have different ideas of what constitutes "bastardization" of a franchise.  I also think I am not the one whose idea is wrong.  In fact, I challenge you to find one single person other than yourself who is willing to come in this thread and say:  "I think Mario Galaxy is a bastardization of 3D Mario, just like Soul Calibur Legends is a bastardization of Soul Calibur."  You are also wrong about Galaxy being just as much of a departure from 3D Mario as SCL was from SC.  Hint:  motion controls aren't the biggest thing that changed in SCL. 

5.  You seem to think that the fact that the Wii Remote has a lot of motion controls means that every single game on the Wii must be and is a radical departure from the way games control and play up through last generation and continuing on the 360 and PS3.  This explains your general attitude, as well as the way you lump SMG in with SCL; however, it is incredibly ignorant.  Not every Wii game relies on the pointer and "waggle".  The Classic Controller does, in fact, exist, and Brawl isn't the only one that it's a better option than the Wii Remote to play the game on. 

Even if I assume the CC doesn't exist, the PSP, with its traditional controls, actually has one analog stick, JUST LIKE THE WII, only not as good; two shoulder buttons, 4 face buttons, and a D-pad.  The Wii has 2 nunchuk buttons, 2 easily accessible buttons (A/B), 2 less-easily-accessible ones (+/-), and a D-pad.  (Not counting the 1/2 buttons, as I'm imagining a grip that pretty much makes them inaccessible.)  ONOZE there might be one or two whole moves that use a motion control instead of a face button.  What tragedy, obviously this explains why the PSP is better suited for a "real" SC game.  Is this honestly your position? 

6.  In that you said, basically, "because the Wii is the weird experimental console", I suppose you did. 

7.  "Couldn't it have gotten what the PSP did instead, or as well?"
You didn't quite answer this one; I suppose it's because the answer is "yes" and that doesn't fit your narrative.