curl-6 said:
bonzobanana said:
Of those wii games you mentioned not one of them I like except for Rayman Origins which was standard definition on wii and looked absolute crap compared to other versions which made the game far less appealling. Personally the golden age of Nintendo was Super Nintendo, N64 and Gamecube. I thought the wii was very weak and didn't buy one until many years after launch and probably played more gamecube games on it than wii games. I'd played and preferred Twilight Princess on gamecube but still not a favourite Zelda of mine. Skyward Sword was also weaker than past efforts yet I absolutely adored windwaker on Gamecube. I loved the mario galaxy games though.
However the big issue with wii was the technology had stood still. Where as 360 and ps3 were delivering cutting edge games with amazing sound and visuals the wii was actually inferior to the original xbox in spec. Many games which were available on both were simply better on the old xbox. It had true 5.1 sound, 32bit colour, hard drive for fast loading and a more powerful gpu, 20 gflops compared to 12 gflops. To me Conker on the xbox looked and sounded far more impressive than mario galaxy. I thought many titles on wii failed to shine due to the low performance level of the wii. It was a very disappointing console if you also owned a ps3 and 360. I never spent much time on the wii and never got good value out of it. So for Nintendo's profit's the wii was a golden age but for me it was a huge fall in gaming quality. It probably didn't help that the era represented a huge improvement in television technology with both plasma and LCD displays both of which the 360 and PS3 looked amazing on but the wii looked like something that was for CRT's only. The same could be said of sound which had the innovation of 5.1 audio which even the older xbox had fully implemented but the wii was still using 2 channel audio with the dolby prologic pseudo surround which was frankly rubbish and no better than the earlier surround systems used on dreamcast or even super nintendo. wii developers were always struggling to make game content as relevant and most third party publishers only offered sub par versions of their main games. There is an immersion level to gaming where you feel that you are really in the game world that you get on pc, playstation and xbox that you simply don't get on Nintendo hardware to the same degree.
Despite the weaker hardware sales of ps3 and 360 they actually sold more software.
http://www.vgchartz.com/analysis/platform_totals/Software/Global/
There is a high percentage of ex wii owners who simply view it as a rubbish console from my experience. Many of these people were marketing led but disappointed with the games available. Many switched to other formats at the time or bought other consoles and let the wii become a dust collector. Not all of course many were very happy with wii but I think there was also a huge level of disappointment with the console.
|
I owned an Xbox 360 last gen and the Wii was not disappointing to me. In fact, while I enjoyed them both, I actually liked the Wii more. Nothing on 360 blew my mind quite like Mario Galaxy did, while motion controls wowed me more than HD graphics. My Wii library is bigger than my 360 library and I'm pretty sure I spent more playtime on my Wii also.
At the end of the day, Wii still outsold both PS3 and Xbox 360.
|
Enjoyed motion controls as something different and games like wii sport etc but felt for many games it took away playability not added. I think famitsu preferred the gamecube controls of twilight princess to those of wii. Don't get me wrong though the motion controls was the saving grace of some games or at least provided reason to double dip on wii u for example (call of duty black ops 2). However as I said software sales were much less on wii and I also believe the average time spent per game is less on wii but can't find the original article I read to back up that up although to be expected with a console with much more casual light gaming experiences overall.
