HappySqurriel said:
jimmay said:
HappySqurriel said:
jimmay said:
I've given many examples that show everything. The facts that you can never get away from are the wii has significantly less top rated games than the 360 and the ps3 overall. Out of the top games (million sellers) the majority of wii games aren't rated as top games where as the 360 and ps3's games are. This shows that casuals are the biggest driving force behind wii sales and they don't have a clue what makes a good game. I have played most of these games and just like most things in life, the things that sell the best generally arent the best and most people have bad taste but these things don't matter to them because they are happy and that's all that matters to them. |
That is a very elitest attitude ... As I pointed out before, in no other entertainment medium do critics use their own personal preference in genre impact their review. Currently, the Hana Motana movie is rated higher than the Bucket List even though you (an many other people) would find The Bucket List to be a more meaningful and deeper movie ... How can Hana Montana be so highly rated in comparison to the Bucket List if the Bucket List is deeper movie? Well, the critics reviewed Hanna Montana in the context of it being a tween movie and as a tween movie they thought it was alright ... This means that their reviews have meaning to the very people who would actually watch that movie. Why then are videogame critics reviewing Wii Sports via the same standard they review Madden by? They're two different games, targeting two different demographics which are each looking for drastically different things from their game ... If someone who is interested in Wii Sports doesn't care about an online leaderboard why should the critic take the lack of an online leaderboard as a negative thing? |
It's not personal preference, each reviewer comes to a game and reviews it on the same scale, it's the only fair way to do it. The bucket list isn't a great movie so that doesnt show anything. As for hana montana, reviewers gave it the score they did because kids like it. Kids normally have bad taste, immature taste and they arent old enough or wise enough to know any better, just because something is good to them doesn't make it good overall. So basically what your saying is, if something is designed to be short, shallow, easy and dumb because casual gamers who have bad taste in games like that then people can't critise it because that is what it was meant to be? hahaha yeah ok. |
So all new music should be put to the standards of quality and technical merit of Opera and Classical music? All new movies should be reviewed under the standards of awards like the Oscars? If this was the case no rock, pop or country artist would see reviews above roughly 1%, and you would never see a comedy or action movie that would receive more than 1 star. This isn't the case though, reviewers consider movies and music in the context of the genre they're released in; Britney Spears is an awful muscian but in the context of been a teen-pop icon she really isn't that bad (and the reviews demonstrate this); and movies like Knocked Up are awful but in the context of being a crude comedy it isn't that bad (and the reviews demonstrate this). The fact that you can not concede this point either demonstrates your ignorance or an amazing bias. Videogame reviewers on the whole have not demonstrated this type of objectivity. No one is expecting a reviewer to go easy on Wii games (or any game) but they do want people to review Puzzle games (as an example) with the realization that there are certain elements that are important for it to be a good puzzle game and certain features people look for from a puzzle game; a puzzle game is not (necessarily) a shallow, easy or dumb game but it doesn't need a strong storyline, an online leaderboard, or multiple multiplayer modes in order to be a good game. |
Well if you truely believe that you can't compare wii's graphics, sound, game options, game length, online features, a.i., gameplay, basically anything that makes a game to that of the x360 and the ps3 then you sure as hell can't compare the sales of the wii to the x360 and ps3 as you claim they are two very different things with two very different sets of standards. So obviously any thread that now comes up in some way comparing the wii's sales to that of the x360 and ps3 you're going to jump in and tell everybody they can't do that because the wii is of a different standard.....because if you didn't then that would make you a hypocrite, and you're not a hypocrite are you?
