Did anyone complain about Black Ops on Wii? Or about Prince Of Persia: Forgotten Sands?

Wii versions of HD games CAN be done properly and still be good, the problem is just that devs decide to experiment with their B teams (on Wii only, since it's the cheapest to develop on).

Edit: Which actually isn't bad at all, but look at Capcom for example. They did that, but not JUST that.. they also released a handful of great games that show they put some effort.

1. i thought people on this site rejected reviews? but regardless i hardly doubt any high profile developer like namco does a game expecting it to bomb in terms of critical reviews... from where i stand they attempted something new and in the end it didn't work out for them but i don't knock them for trying because thats what leads to innovation... its like how people claim the golden eye remake is better now with wii controls... if the devs hadn't attempted it this obviously wouldn't have happened 

2. never said that but as i said "the wii was to open up new forms of gameplay" right or wrong? if thats right why come down on them so hard when they attempt it?

3. "A true gamer rejects the bastardization of a beloved series"

what makes mario galaxy any less of a bastardisation? because it was successful? because you say so? 

 "A true gamer doesn't have the attitude of "sucks to be you, but it's your fault if you don't own the console where developers choose to put their real games on"

What you are arguing is that the Wii is a big piece of shit and deserved everything it had coming."

go back and quote me where i said any of that shit

1. 2. never before have i seen someone be so critical of devs for trying something new is an era where gamers are crying out for originality what you've basically been saying is you'd rather devs keep gaming secluded to what we know now instead of pushing forward with new ideas and innovating...

with this process there will be occasions where devs fail soul calibur is an example of this but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been attempted 

3. well i just put this down to you being paronoid 

"then you better have someone backing your views up"

proof of what i've been claiming is readily available... go to google type in "originality" and "gaming" and read the links that come up... as i said this is something that is becoming a hot topic in the industry that devs aren't doing new things instead relying on the same formula thats assured sales ( a good example is people complaining about CoD )... and thats why i commend devs attempting new things like what was done with legends

this is what i said

"this is something that is becoming a hot topic in the industry that devs aren't doing new things instead relying on the same formula thats assured sales"

this is what you said 

"say that the way going forward is taking established series, completely abandon their core gameplay and move them into a different genre."

you see any differences between those 2?

"I said that you should find someone who is backing up your views in the preceding post and with that I meant all of it"

to be honest i never took this seriously as it seemed so absurd to me... 

"You are constantly losing the argument"

funny enough i had a different impression 

"so you twist words around"

lol not as bad as you "What you are arguing is that the Wii is a big piece of shit and deserved everything it had coming."

"deny that you said certain things"

yup when you said this "What you are arguing is that the Wii is a big piece of shit and deserved everything it had coming."

i said : "go back and quote me where i said any of that shit" because i never said any of that nothing even close...

"generally try to distract from the points that were being made"

i guess maybe

"You want to be a gamer who appreciates all sorts of gaming"

lol want to be? i am i've play games across all consoles and love experiences exclusive to each can you even honestly make that claim?

and as i pointed out before anyone who loves all sorts of gaming would want options which was provided in the situation with legends instead of making all versions follow the same formula the wii version was taken in a different direction which arguably wasn't a good direction but i still commend the devs for trying something new

"it really isn't worth responding to."

yeah i wouldn't think hypocritical claims made by myself are worthwhile either

" you want to be this guy who is absolutely fair in his judgment."

and you don't? so am i to believe you intend to be biased?

 "Your whole argumentation in this thread has run in direct contradiction with the gamer you want to be."

i don't get this no one can experience all of the great games of this gen on one console thats a common understanding... i could just as easily claim that the 360 and ps3 should have gotten games like muramasa or dragon quest but guess what they're wii exclusive

o_O.Q, I'm appalled that you think publishers are doing a SERVICE to Wii gamers by "experimenting" on them with games like Soul Calibur Legends. Do you think it's sheer coincidence that whenever 360/PS3 get a big name game, and the Wii gets a version that's a totally different type of game, the latter game is the one that's a piece of trash?

Why don't the PS3 and 360 get these types of "experiments"? Because they care about those audiences, and not the Wii gamers. Do you deny it?

"soul calibur legends shows developer negligence is uncalled for." Quite the opposite: SCL was a slap in the face. I played it. Have you?

...
"if someone wanted classic soul calibur theres the HD twins if they wanted something new theres the wii version"
"its funny that people demand that devs try new things in games or games will get stale and boring but when devs actually try it you find people protesting"
"the point of the wii was to open up new forms of gameplay which they attempted"

You've brought this topic up in one form or another in just about every single one of your last 20 posts or so, and I have to say it smells to me like a desperate attempt to redirect the discussion.

(I recall that your very first post in this thread was about how publishers developed for Nintendo "similarly to how they develope for 360 and ps3", and now you seem to be arguing the EXACT OPPOSITE. Curious. And you then said that the Wii gets good and bad games "just like the PS2", hmm, I don't recall the PS2 getting weird, inevitably crappy spinoffs of every major franchise. Oh well.)

Where was I? Oh yes, you say developers do respect the Wii, it's just that it's so weak it can't be ported to, so they experiment on it, which we should be happy for because we complain about too much of the same old same old, right? (And Soul Calibur Legends was treated just as seriously as Mario Galaxy by its developers, I think you said, but I'll assume that was your trained monkey slapping the keyboard while you looked away.)

Again, this is ridiculous. The PSP got a "traditional" version of Soul Calibur. It certainly wasn't any less handicapped in its hardware than the Wii. The Wii controller, with Nunchuk, has a better analog stick and more buttons. (I assume even you wouldn't dispute the Wii is more powerful.) So: why was the Wii singled out for the weird experimental version? Couldn't it have gotten what the PSP did instead, or as well?

Your argument, if I can call it that, of "lol I thought you wanted new stuff?" falls apart when it's ONLY the Wii getting these and they're almost ALWAYS trash. This isn't taking the industry in a new direction. It's disrespecting the Wii audience. And the fact that you can't see that may be why Rol figures you disrespect them too.

Nintendo shouldn't get what they don't deserve, they're probably the worse third party publisher to work with out of the big three and yet people still can't grasp why third party support on the Wii can't match the output of games on the PS3/360.

List:
- The HD consoles sell their games for $60 each at launch, that is significantly more than the $50 or lower they'd have to launch with on the Wii.

- The games people want ported from the HD consoles (Assassins Creed 2) cannot be easily ported to the Wii without major drawbacks. The resolution would make it downright ugly, the number of NPCs on screen would be significantly less, the draw distance would be much shorter and fairly foggy, the AI of the NPCs would be less intelligent, the frame-rate might take a hit, the controller layout would have to be adjusted specifically to suit the Wii remote and that could get janky. People will see the port and criticise it, if you don't want a port then you basically want a whole new AAA game made exclusively for the Wii and then that'd be criticised when Ubisoft Montreal don't have the man power to shift 100 developers to a whole new project for a platform with a history of not selling similar types of games.

- Ubisoft can't make money after the initial purchase, why should they go through the extra effort of porting or developing a new game when one of their largest sources of revenue can't be accessed because Nintendo were too cheap to put a hard drive into the Wii. DLC is important to them, it was also important for a lot of big third party games this generation.

- Nintendo aren't making any sort of effort in trying to persuade these publishers, what can they give? Sony and Microsoft are all about attracting third party publishers to their platform, it could be by funding their games, allowing Steam on the platform, putting them in the spotlight for Summer of Arcade, buying exclusive content, buying exclusive launch windows and just making their platforms as appealing as possible to develop and release games on. Nintendo doesn't make a quarter of the effort and when they do try it's always half hearted.

There are so many reasons why third party publishers choose to avoid the Wii and most of it is Nintendo's fault, they made the choice early on about what their system would be and how they'd market it and they've stuck to that stance for the last five years. Just Dance sells very well on the Wii, Ubisoft have made a legitimate effort to put out good games on the console and none of them have worked out, they're just sticking to what works.

Whats even funnier is that some will try to crap on the HD libraries and say they are unoriginal, but then turn around and cry about why this game is not on Wii or why the Wii version sucks so bad. Which one is it?? Either you dont want the "unoriginal games" or you do

And when they do get original games some of them still complain, ok granted, SC Legends and that Castlevania Judgement were kinda crap. But what of DS, those RE chronicles?? Lets be real, those games were hated before they even hit the shelves, some people were judging it on what it wasnt except for what it WAS. I think quality of games is subjective, but i sorta agree with the last point