Skyrim wins 2011 VGA GOTY award and over a dozen more.

[lestatdark]

The_Joker_Product said:

lestatdark said:

The_Joker_Product said:

lestatdark said:

The_Joker_Product said:

Meh you were just being overly picky though to spin it in your favour, pretty much every PS3/Xbox 360 game as DLC that can add anything from costumes to even new levels. This is not common with the DS. Same with the multiplayer, its is not as common nor as good as what you could can get on any decent online game on PS3/Xbox 360.

The controls still stuck for most games on the Wii, theres plenty of game ive played that were good but let down by awful controls.

Theres good and bad games on both consoles, but just look at the scores for this year only 2 Wii games got above a 90, no DS game got over a 90. While PS3 has 11 and Xbox 360 9. The difference in quality between the average game for these consoles is huge., anything below an 80 on PS3 isnt even worth considering. Not even 5 games on the Wii got above an 80 this year.

Actually, the online funcionalities of the DS are just as good as the PS3/360. Again, i'll point you to the case of Pokemon, which is still the paramount title in online functionalities (i.e - the number of players that every pokemon version has far surpasses any game on the PS3&360 and every single player can play online with one another). It might be a different system, but it works either way. 

Controls are not properly a quantifiable metric, unless it's the cases were it's proven that the controls are an impediment to the actual gameplay. Alas, one of the most proeminent cases of bad control input is a PS3 title - Lair - which had rather serious control issues or even cases in some major titles which the inputs have some serious lag to them - Uncharted 3 -. Most of the issues that people have with some controller interface stem from their own inability to adapt to them or because it's rather different from their most common denominator.
Thus a Wii gamer only will have trouble adapting to the PS3/360 controller scheme and vice-versa. Same happens when a console player tries to adapt at first to the KB+Mouse interface of the PC. 

Well, considering the fact that the DS is being out-phased in detriment of the 3DS, it's rather normal not to have high critical score titles. But then again, since when a score of 90 is a threshold for a measuring stick of quality? Pokemon Black and White, which are both acknowledge not only by the majority of the fanbase, but also a large number of critics to be the best entry of the Pokemon franchise to date, even though it's "sitting" at 87 on Metacritic which doesn't have the scores for Gen 2 and Gen 1 pokemon games but whose reviews can easily be found on the net (the majority being perfect or close to perfect scores). 

A simple number doesn't determine quality nor "rights" to compete between games. Fun factor, critical peer view, public opinion and objective worth has more value than just stamping a 90, 80, 70 or 60 inoquous number next to the name of a game. 

The multiplayer experience on the DS is nothing compared to the PS3/Xbox. Pokemon...really? ive played DS games online, its not the same as you playing a game with a dozen people while talking to people on headsets which happens commonly or going through a storymode of a game with your friend who you can invite along.

Lairs controls sucked because of the sixaxis which was a failed idea that pretty much nobody uses now, it was also a very early game. Goldeneye only came out last year and its controls still suck, ive had the Wii for a few years now so im not new to it either. Its no wonder these FPS games dont sell on the Wii.

Its no surprise Pokemon doesnt have a greater score, the games have barely changed at all. Its pretty much the same game but with worse looking character designs. The original Pokemon Red had great character designs, the ones in the newer games are just plain awful, the ones in your signature prove that completely.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't there very few games on PS3 and 360 that allow you to do that, instead of relying on alternative co-op modes? Then again, DS has some examples like that as well, mainly Dragon Quest IX. It's one thing playing a 6 hour co-op mode and an another entire different thing to play a +100 hour RPG with a friend and that's only counting the main story and not the extra dungeons and DLC content. 

Odd, Wii users mostly don't complain about the controls of Goldeneye and most FPS's on the Wii. It's mostly non-Wii users or people that are accostumed to the setups of PS3 and 360 that do, which says a lot. Lair is an example of crappy controls by design flaw not because people find it crappy because it's different from what they are used to. 

Actually, the best designs are from the Gold/Silver era, but I digress. A formula doesn't need to be changed if it works and if the fanbase and critical peer review agrees with it. That's why every new iteration of Zelda, which is basically the same as the previous one, still gets ravishing reviews, because the formula is good.

Alas a lot of games this generation, under the cover of different names and IPs, use basically rehashed formulas from one another. I don't see how is that different from Game Freak using their own formula (instead of copying from another), from doing the same and still keep their fanbase happy. 

Take for example Skyrim. Do you know what is the single difference from Arena and Daggerfall? It's better First Person View implementation. Other than that, if you go to the core of every Elder Scrolls game, they're pretty much the same and I don't see anyone complaining now do I? Heck, the biggest changes in the series were implemented on Daggerfall. But again, what I've learned this generation is that a lot of people are newcomers to Bethesda and ES games (started with Oblivion), so they're kinda oblivious to how similar the new games are to the past ones, be it for the record of glitchiness of their games or how Skyrim is the most stable release Bethesda ever made.

You can't have one measuring stick for one game and have a different for another. Not only is that not fair, it's biased, untrue, unprofessional (for the critical reviewers who do that, and unfortunately they're in the majority) and simply goes against anything a gamer should do. 

Theres plenty games where you can do a campaign with a friend, Resident Evil 5, Dead Rising 2, Saints Row 2, Little Big Planet, Dead Island etc.

Ive heard alot of people complain about the controls on Goldeneye, i once had a conversation on here about having to spend more time adjusting the controller setting than actually playing the game at one point and the other guy had the same problem. Ive seen others like that, the controls arnt as precise as the PS3/Xbox.

They work fine with things like Mario Galaxy, simple platformers, driving games or dance games, but when it comes to FPS games or 3rd person action games its got nothing on the PS3. The controls obviously arnt gonna be equal to PS3 though anyway everyone knows that.

Funny how its ok for Pokemon and Zelda to be the same game everytime and get away with it yet Call of Duty only ever gets flack for it. Last Pokemon i played was just as much a copy and paste as MW3.

A 90 on the Wii is as worthwhile as a 90 on the PS3, but because the games are so much poorer on Wii the expectations are alot lower. If Xenoblade were a PS3 game it would never have gotten a 92 that would be equal to Uncharted 3's score but that game was nominated for GOTY and Xenoblade nothing.

Rayman Origins gets a 91 on the Wii swhile the vastly superior Little Big Planet 2 gets a 92. It gets a 91 though the exact same game on PS3 gets a 87. Its just like God of War Chains of Olympus getting a 91 on PSP while God of War 3 gets a 92 even though its obviously the much better game, but they arnt gonna give a PSP game a much lower because it doesnt compare to a PS3 compare thats not gonna be fair to it.

Well, I've been playing FPSs on both the Wii and PS3&360 and all of those consoles have examples of poorly implemented controls. Then again, i'm more used to the KB+Mouse setup, which is vastly superior in terms of adaptability and reactions than any console input simply because of it's layout. 

Not to say that console FPSs don't have good commands, but adaptation to one or other setup takes time. For example, I much prefer the FPS setup of Metroid Prime 3: Corruption than that of COD 4: MW on the PS3 (my only COD for consoles), because not only is it more accurate, it also allows me to perform pinpoint manouvers that which with a dual analog stick I can't do. 

While I agree that most pokemon games do copy and paste from the previous iterations, just adding a new story and a new set of pokemon, there have been entries that have advanced the series. Again, that's where White/Black come in, since it's the entry that has added a lot to the pokemon formula, be it with a new focus on storyline (which was rather well done, for being Game Freak's first attempt), new dynamic battle systems (The triple and rotation battles) a complete revamp of the PVP system and massive overall changes to moves and setups. 

In the case of MW, I see no reason why they shouldn't use the same formula if it works for their fans. I've got no qualms against it as it has been shown to work and that a lot of people enjoy it. What I do have a qualm about is when in the case of MW that usually means no harm in the eyes of the majority of the critics and in other cases repetition of the same formula means stagnation (mostly RPGS suffer from these kind of dual standards). 

Xenoblade wasn't put up for GOTY for the single reason that it hasn't come out in every part of the world, just EU and JP. Then again, when was the last time you saw a JRPG game being put up for GOTY, even if it had much more quality than any other game? Those kind of RPGs aren't mass market and public perception of them isn't as wide as a game like Uncharted, Gears or COD has, thus the critics perception also has to take in account that factor. 

Expectations of what a game should or should not do, based on the console is a faux pas. In that regard, then the only games that should ever get GOTY recognition and would be deserving of such would have to be PC games, because you can't expect a PS3 or 360 to do the same as a PC in terms of sheer performance or capacity in terms of development, thus by those standards Minecraft should also be a GOTY contender. Plus, PC peer reviewers (like PC Gamer) tend to be much harsher on their reviews due to the high expectations behind a PC game.

By what measuring stick are you saying that GoW 3 is vastly superior than GoW: Chain of Olympus? Your own opinion or the fact that one is on the PS3 and the other is on the PSP? Because to me, owning both, Chain of Olympus is better than GoW 3, which in fact I consider to be the worst GoW out there as it completely butchers the story (which began being butchered on GoW 2). In terms of gameplay both games are similar and in terms of scale, CoO has a massive scale in terms of what the PSP can do, just like GoW3 on the PS3.

That's argument is a strawman argument, as it has no basis other than your own perception of what a game should be, which seems to me (and correct me if i'm wrong), more expansive graphical output.