Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Rank this game--Wii Play!!

Tagged games:

How much do you Play?

I Play ALL the time! 3 11.54%
 
I let others Play for me. 0 0.00%
 
Wii Play together! 4 15.38%
 
I refuse to Play! 10 38.46%
 
What is this?!? I don't even.... 6 23.08%
 
See results you boring person. 3 11.54%
 
Total:26
Machina said:
brendude13 said:
Machina said:

1.0

The 1 is for tanks, which was pretty cool, though playing all the other atrocious games to get there was not.

Half of the games are boring
All but one of the games is truly boring. Half are broken concepts from the get-go that I cannot believe were ever green lit (Find Mii, Pose Mii, Fishing). Those that have sound concepts either have broken controls (Billiards, Table Tennis(!!!), Laser Hockey), or are so dull and basic as to not be worth playing anyway (Shooting Range, Charge).

Tanks is the last game you unlock, so in order to get to the only game which is worth playing you have to complete all of the others. Billiards and Table Tennis are so broken that we just rushed to get them over with as soon as we possibly could (easier said than done in the case of Billiards, alas), and I didn't revisist any of the other games... ever.

I've not really done a very good job of articulating what an awful waste of space this game is, but my vote is deadly serious; it's a compilation of crappy, awful, barely playable games. Even though at the time it was the only way to get my hands on an extra Wiimote, I still regret buying it, and I hate myself for adding to those enormous sales figures because it doesn't deserve a single one of them.

Machina filled with rage?

This cannot be o.0

I was more enraged in the 'Rioting in London' thread. Wii Play is probably the worst game I've played this gen.

Same, I think this country has a very serious problem.

But it can't be THAT bad can it, especially for the price.



Around the Network
brendude13 said:
 

Same, I think this country has a very serious problem.

But it can't be THAT bad can it, especially for the price.


Maybe I was a little harsh, afterall I can think of worse things to do than play through Wii Play again - like play through the entirety of Far Cry 2, or Dead Rising, which would drive me mental - but still... no.



This has to be the fifth "best thread ever". I feel deceived.



RolStoppable said:
yo_john117 said:
RolStoppable said:

You need to add 0.1 points to your score, otherwise it won't count.

Lol it doesn't work that way.

This is your ranking game and now you are telling me that you don't even understand your own rules?

It's basically a curve like this.

Ok look at the Linear side. Now think of the .1 as a high score, the 1.1 as a really low score and the blue/red curve how much effort you have to put into it.



I agree for people who were not or are not used to playing games, especially like this with motion this was a good starter game. For me though....I just didn't feel it. Not even the tanks game was much of a laster for me.



    The NINTENDO PACT 2015[2016  Vgchartz Wii U Achievement League! - Sign up now!                      My T.E.C.H'aracter

Around the Network
yo_john117 said:
RolStoppable said:

This is your ranking game and now you are telling me that you don't even understand your own rules?

It's basically a curve like this.

Ok look at the Linear side. Now think of the .1 as a high score, the 1.1 as a really low score and the blue/red curve how much effort you have to put into it.

That's not what your rule is defined as though. What your rule actually says is that you don't have to put effort into as long as you score a game 5.1 or higher and that you only have to go in great detail, if you score a game 5.0 or lower. That's what it is and that's how everyone understands it. I mean, just look at KylieDog's posts in this thread.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
yo_john117 said:
RolStoppable said:

This is your ranking game and now you are telling me that you don't even understand your own rules?

It's basically a curve like this.

Ok look at the Linear side. Now think of the .1 as a high score, the 1.1 as a really low score and the blue/red curve how much effort you have to put into it.

That's not what your rule is defined as though. What your rule actually says is that you don't have to put effort into as long as you score a game 5.1 or higher and that you only have to go in great detail, if you score a game 5.0 or lower. That's what it is and that's how everyone understands it. I mean, just look at KylieDog's posts in this thread.

That's how it's pretty much always been and that's how I have always counted up the threads. And I seriously thought everyone knew (especially since I haven't had a problem with it until this thread)

It's why Marco's scores didn't count even though they were 5.5

And now that I think about it its actually not a curve it's more like steps...3 steps to be exact.

Step 1: 7-10 (not much effort)

Step 2: 5-6.9 ( a decent amount of effort)

Step 3: 1-4.9 (a lot of effort)



yo_john117 said:

That's how it's pretty much always been and that's how I have always counted up the threads. And I seriously thought everyone knew (especially since I haven't had a problem with it until this thread)

It's why Marco's scores didn't count even though they were 5.5

And now that I think about it its actually not a curve it's more like steps...3 steps to be exact.

Step 1: 7-10 (not much effort)

Step 2: 5-6.9 ( a decent amount of effort)

Step 3: 1-4.9 (a lot of effort)

Marco's score didn't count, because we do not trust Marco regardless of the score he gives to any given game.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
yo_john117 said:

That's how it's pretty much always been and that's how I have always counted up the threads. And I seriously thought everyone knew (especially since I haven't had a problem with it until this thread)

It's why Marco's scores didn't count even though they were 5.5

And now that I think about it its actually not a curve it's more like steps...3 steps to be exact.

Step 1: 7-10 (not much effort)

Step 2: 5-6.9 ( a decent amount of effort)

Step 3: 1-4.9 (a lot of effort)

Marco's score didn't count, because we do not trust Marco regardless of the score he gives to any given game.

Back in the day I would have allowed stuff like this to happen. But everyone wanted me to be more fair so now I am an absolute hardass when it comes to this stuff.



yo_john117 said:

Back in the day I would have allowed stuff like this to happen. But everyone wanted me to be more fair so now I am an absolute hardass when it comes to this stuff.

Yea. Yo_john's got buns'o'steel!