twesterm said:
windbane said:
scottie said:
Look, all non Wii owners should just be glad the game actually made it to your console
This is essentially an exclusive Wii game with a crappy PS3 and 360 port |
It's generally showcased as an HD game, but believe what you want =) |
Online doesn't matter?
windbane said:
thetonestarr said:
Profcrab said:
thetonestarr said:
I'm not sure why people keep saying this is a "gimped version". It has all the exact same features except DLC, correct? DLC isn't THAT big a deal. It's definitely nice, but certainly nothing to consider the game "gimped" over. |
Your right, not having the option to play two thirds (56 songs in the game/100 DLC songs so for) of the available songs for the game wouldn't make the game gimped at all . . . |
Considering the fact that you're paying extra for that, and many people (see: most casual gamers and fair chunk of the hardcore crowd) don't care for paying for extra content... ...yeaaaaaaah. Not to mention the Wii version has 63 songs, not 56. Additionally, Guitar Hero III isn't considered "gimped" even though it doesn't have DLC, like II did. AND, Rockband has more-or-less the same number of songs as GH, but a much more complex game setup and a more diverse offering. How does any of that make it gimped? Okay, no DLC. But, uh, if you DO get every single downloadable song, you end up paying over $250 for the whole thing in the end. For those of us that don't want to spend more than the already tremendous $170, there's nothing missing out. DLC? Big deal. |
Wii version only has 5 extra songs, so either 56 or 63 is wrong. 10 million song downloads don't lie. 4 million in the last month and a half. Lots of people are downloading songs. Even just 5 of your favorites completely makes the game. You get to pick and choose every week. GH DLC = garbage in comparison to Rock Band. It is gimped because of no DLC, which is Nintendo's fault (as Rocktpig and MrStickBall have said: why would EA not want more money?), as well as no character creation, world tour mode, online play, etc, which is Harmonix's fault I guess. It's a PS2 port with 5 extra songs. At least with the PS2 instruments you can use them with the PS3 because they are the same, so a future console purchase gives you DLC without having to pay for more instruments. Hopfully the Wii instruments are compatible as well. |
windbane said:
Galaxy's flaws: camera. powerups timed, limited, suck. difficulty only on a few later levels. no online (16-player open world, anyone). oh wait...no multiplayer (no, getting star bits doesn't count). Replay to get 121 stars = pointless = limited replayability.
Great game? Yes. Lots of flaws? Yes.
Keep the GTA hate coming, guys...although, you do take the cake by suggesting every publication was bribed. Wow. |
|
Wow, how long have you been saving this up? I hope not too long.
First of all, nowhere in this thread did I say "online doesn't matter." In fact, since there is no online play (as other MODS have said), I also didn't say "multiplayer doesn't matter."
Now, in order of my quotes you saved that have nothing to do with this thread: I have said repeatedly that I don't think Rock Band is about online multiplayer. It's best played locally. My quote up there is about DLC, which the Wii doesn't have enough space for. That has nothing to do with online play.
The 2nd quote was about GTA IV getting perfect scores despite having flaws, and someone claiming that Galaxy was a game that should be scored higher. While scores come down to opinions, all I was doing there was listing flaws in the game. Would I review it lower than 90%? No. It's a fantastic game. However, it does have flaws. The main point is that a game doesn't have to be flawless to get a perfect score...TO ME. A lot of people disagree; they like the gymnastics scale of perfection.
Galaxy has very limited multiplayer. One of the great additions of GTA IV is multiplayer. Before, it was just a single player game, much like main Mario games. Now, it has multiplayer. Galaxy had collecting star bits. Should that lower the score? Perhaps not, but if you are judging a game based on whether it should be Game of the Year, it could be a big factor. When I finished Galaxy, I sent it back to gamefly. When I finish GTA IV, I can play online multiplayer.
Now, finally, back on topic: I am not purchasing this Star Wars game. Like most games, I will rent it. I said that it's fortunate that I wasn't anticipating multiplayer for this game because I just want to play the single player game for the story. Now, other people, namely Tabsina, had a reasoned discusion with me about it. I said it worries me that all the games have different qualities. It could be a sign of trouble that the game doesn't have multiplayer except on the Wii. I never said "multiplayer doesn't matter." I merely said I will probably prefer the HD version of the game because of the technical qualities of the game. Why you have to resort to this pointless post about me is beyond me.
