I think that all of us who own a Wii can agree on two points:

1. There are a lot of games out there that are interesting to the point that others are envious.
2. There appears to be quite a bit of copying of the concept of motion controls going on with regard to control style in peripherals coming out this year.

The first comes from the article -- and the conversation herein.
The second comes from general observation.

Finally, with regard to general observation, posters should be smarter than to rise to the bait of another - particularly if the person does not own the system they are trashing and has not built up a reputation of being generally fair and even-handed in their comments and criticisms.

Mike from Morgantown

Qays said: If that's the case, perhaps you should give it up? I honestly didn't expect you to take that comment seriously. Allow me to clarify: trolling doesn't burn me. If you do honestly think MH3 is better than Demon's Souls I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning.

The two games are so different, I think there's little point in direct comparison honestly.  It's like comparing DS to Shiren, there's some overarching design similarities, but in the end they're really pretty different.  Between MH and DS, MH's more skill, pattern and teamwork based, DS is more grind, luck and risk-reward based. I just found it amusing you'd immediately dismiss a high production, high value, hardware pushing, online game like MH3, yet elevate a fairly niche dungeon crawler like Demon's Souls to AAA status alongside Mario/GT/whatever.

And don't worry, I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread's learned not to take you seriously at this point.

Demon's Souls is not luck based in the slightest. Did you see any of the reviews for it? If you die, it's because yous suck and need to get better. The game is very fair. MH is more skil based? Demon's Souls requires great skill, and not because the game is cheap. Have you played it, or just Monster Hunter? Or either?

Qays said: Mario kart wii is totally differen then mario kart double dash. Might want to play them again? Same goes for smash bros brawl. This is simply untrue.

This is simply untrue.  Well, Smash comes closer. Brawl tends to lurch more fanservicey with all the extra content, but the underlying games are fairly similar.  Melee's tighter though, a lot of the more advanced priorities were nerfed in Brawl.  This is probably why Brawl's never really taken off as a tournament game, while Melee did.

On the other hand, Mario Kart Wii is almost nothing like Double Dash.  It's really centered around online play and challenges, bikes bring in huge new set of dynamics, item system was tweaked for accessibility, boost mechanic was tweaked to kill snaking, they dropped DD's co-op component all together... even the course design is tighter and less "gimmicky" than DD.  Hell, if anything it's more like MKDS in terms of design sensibilities, only better looking and deeper.

 

Still though, if you really think these games are just carbon copy updates, then you really haven't invested more than a superficial amount of time in them.  And in Mario Kart's case, even that's likely giving you too much credit, the differences are fairly significant and immediate.

NYANKS said: Demon's Souls is not luck based in the slightest. Did you see any of the reviews for it? If you die, it's because yous suck and need to get better. The game is very fair. MH is more skil based? Demon's Souls requires great skill, and not because the game is cheap. Have you played it, or just Monster Hunter? Or either?

Luck isn't the right word exactly, it's more risk/reward.  Luck's still a bigger component though than in MH given item drops.  You really have less of that in MH, even with harvesting.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying DS isn't skill based.  I'm just saying MH is more skill based.  It's about pattern recog, timing and dexterity at it's core.  It's really much more of an action game.

Hahahaha, what? I'm sorry, what? Demon's Souls is based on grinding? Grinding won't get you anywhere in DS, you'll die to yard trash no matter how awesome your stats and armor are if you're not careful. There's also very little room for luck: every fight is the same as it was last time. No fight is random. The game honestly favors memorization of attack patterns, creative use of environment and gameplay mechanics, and quick reaction times over luck.

Compare to Monster Hunter: the entire point of the game is to grind the same missions over and over again until you get the rare mats required to make better weapons, long after the point where those missions stopped being challenging. Monster Hunter is in many respects more similar to an MMO like WoW than it is to a console RPG, at least as far as its advancement system is concerned.

And compare the teamwork aspect: Demon's Souls has one of the most revolutionary multiplayer frameworks I've ever seen in a game. It encourages collaboration between players, but it also allows for some really cutthroat PvP.

And I never claimed Demon's Souls was a AAA title. It's not. It doesn't have obscene production values, it's not marketed to the mass market. What it is is a spectacular game, easily one of the best of the generation.

Have you even played Demon's Souls?

Earning the respect of Wii fans is not really my primary goal. I'm more interested in figuring out if there's anything to what the Wii fans are saying, and the only way to do that is to engage them in debate.

Item drops? What do you mean? If you're referring to stones, that's not really the case unless you're trying to max out every weapon for the trophy - you're guaranteed enough drops of every stone to upgrade your weapon of choice to max by the end of a NG+, and doing so isn't really even going to help you that much. Beyond stones there's really nothing in DS that you need to get lucky for: all the worthwhile equipment is guaranteed to drop from bosses, or guaranteed to be in the same place on the ground in every playthrough.

How is DS less about pattern recognition than MH? The entire game is entirely pattern recognition, dealing with patterns that span entire levels. I'll give you that DS is less about timing and dexterity than MH, but only because DS has a greater variety of boss fights: in a fight like Flamelurker or False King or Maneater it's ALL timing and dexterity, in a fight like Dragon God that element is comparatively lessened.

Well, okay maybe in drops but I mean the actual gameplay as in the, you know, fighting? The actual gameplay is amazingly solid. Although I'm sure MH is great too.

I'll concede your point vis à vis Mario Kart Wii vs Mario Kart GameCube, as I haven't played much of the Wii game. My statement was more in reference to Super Smash, which I've played a lot of on both consoles: it's fundamentally the same game, with a few gameplay tweaks around the edges.

Qays said: The two games are so different, I think there's little point in direct comparison honestly. It's like comparing DS to Shiren, there's some overarching design similarities, but in the end they're really pretty different. Between MH and DS, MH's more skill, pattern and teamwork based, DS is more grind, luck and risk-reward based. I just found it amusing you'd immediately dismiss a high production, high value, hardware pushing, online game like MH3, yet elevate a fairly niche dungeon crawler like Demon's Souls to AAA status alongside Mario/GT/whatever. Hahahaha, what? I'm sorry, what? Demon's Souls is based on grinding? Grinding won't get you anywhere in DS, you'll die to yard trash no matter how awesome your stats and armor are if you're not careful. There's also very little room for luck: every fight is the same as it was last time. No fight is random. The game honestly favors memorization of attack patterns, creative use of environment and gameplay mechanics, and quick reaction times over luck. Compare to Monster Hunter: the entire point of the game is to grind the same missions over and over again until you get the rare mats required to make better weapons, long after the point where those missions stopped being challenging. Monster Hunter is in many respects more similar to an MMO like WoW than it is to a console RPG, at least as far as its advancement system is concerned. And compare the teamwork aspect: Demon's Souls has one of the most revolutionary multiplayer frameworks I've ever seen in a game. It encourages collaboration between players, but it also allows for some really cutthroat PvP. And I never claimed Demon's Souls was a AAA title. It's not. It doesn't have obscene production values, it's not marketed to the mass market. What it is is a spectacular game, easily one of the best of the generation. Have you even played Demon's Souls? And don't worry, I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread's learned not to take you seriously at this point. Earning the respect of Wii fans is not really my primary goal. I'm more interested in figuring out if there's anything to what the Wii fans are saying, and the only way to do that is to engage them in debate. Luck isn't the right word exactly, it's more risk/reward.  Luck's still a bigger component though than in MH given item drops.  You really have less of that in MH, even with harvesting. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying DS isn't skill based.  I'm just saying MH is more skill based.  It's about pattern recog, timing and dexterity at it's core.  It's really much more of an action game. Item drops? What do you mean? If you're referring to stones, that's not really the case unless you're trying to max out every weapon for the trophy - you're guaranteed enough drops of every stone to upgrade your weapon of choice to max by the end of a NG+, and doing so isn't really even going to help you that much. Beyond stones there's really nothing in DS that you need to get lucky for: all the worthwhile equipment is guaranteed to drop from bosses, or guaranteed to be in the same place on the ground in every playthrough. How is DS less about pattern recognition than MH? The entire game is entirely pattern recognition, dealing with patterns that span entire levels. I'll give you that DS is less about timing and dexterity than MH, but only because DS has a greater variety of boss fights: in a fight like Flamelurker or False King or Maneater it's ALL timing and dexterity, in a fight like Dragon God that element is comparatively lessened.

I admit, I haven't played DS.  Most of my knowledge comes from reading impressions and listening to podcasts.  I was under the impression that the core of the game involved harvesting souls, and basically balancing that with the unforgiving progression structure.

But, uh... MH is almost only boss fights and pattern recognition, that's literally what almost the entirety of  gameplay is, hunting giant dinosaurs, learning their patterns and behaviors, learning your own priorities and skill sets, factoring environmental variables, cooperating with and balancing your party to take them down. And the teamwork is engrained in the core design (and really necessary to progress past a certain point), while (from my understanding) the multiplayer aspect of DS is chiefly passive (more like an expanded take on ghost runs)?

Qays said: This is simply untrue. Well, Smash comes closer. Brawl tends to lurch more fanservicey with all the extra content, but the underlying games are fairly similar. Melee's tighter though, a lot of the more advanced priorities were nerfed in Brawl. This is probably why Brawl's never really taken off as a tournament game, while Melee did. On the other hand, Mario Kart Wii is almost nothing like Double Dash. It's really centered around online play and challenges, bikes bring in huge new set of dynamics, item system was tweaked for accessibility, boost mechanic was tweaked to kill snaking, they dropped DD's co-op component all together... even the course design is tighter and less "gimmicky" than DD. Hell, if anything it's more like MKDS in terms of design sensibilities, only better looking and deeper. Still though, if you really think these games are just carbon copy updates, then you really haven't invested more than a superficial amount of time in them. And in Mario Kart's case, even that's likely giving you too much credit, the differences are fairly significant and immediate. I'll concede your point vis à vis Mario Kart Wii vs Mario Kart GameCube, as I haven't played much of the Wii game. My statement was more in reference to Super Smash, which I've played a lot of on both consoles: it's fundamentally the same game, with a few gameplay tweaks around the edges.

I'm a fairly casual Smash player, so I'm not really the best person to speak on their finer intricacies. But the Smash community seems pretty starkly divided for them to be "fundamentally the same game".  If they were, you'd figure Brawl would also have a thriving tourney scene...