Wait, it say right in the article only DS/PSP have online.

Wii has multiplayer locally only. NO ONLINE. So HD owners you don't need to feel like you're getting jipped - much.

It just really annoys me. I spent many years playing the jedi knight multiplayer modes and I was looking for a next gen replacement. The single player looks good aswell but it just removes something thats essential to my enjoyment of these type of games. If I wanted a solely single player jedi game I'd play kotor, which has far more depth. My brother will probably end up buying this for the wii, but I was going to buy it for the 360 aswell. Which is now not going to happen. Lucas Arts idea is a great one, but it really amounts to cutting essential features from the product instead of adding anything on top of that. Their plan backfired in my case as my houeshold wont be buying multiple copies of the game now. What they should have done is have the complete experience for all systems, eg multiplayer, physics (to the best of the hardwares abilities) and single player etc and then added the unique features on-top of the base product. Sure it would have upped costs, but then again gimping certain versions is IMO going to limit sales for said versions.

As pointed out earlier in the thread, this is not an attack on the wii version. Far from it. I'm glad the wii's getting a great version. Its more just sheer disappointment at the other versions :(

Just saw this:

NZGamer: The Wii version is going to have a slightly different story isn’t it?

Dan: The great thing about working on the Wii version with Krome studios we were able to come up with some unique content - five different missions in three locations that you won’t find on the PS3 and 360. One of those missions is the Jedi Temple; it kind of weaves into the story. Darth Vader sends you to the Jedi Temple; it has been destroyed after the Clone Wars and you’re there investigating, you’re seeing what’s going on and you go into these Jedi Trials which teach you about yourself, makes you stronger and puts you against these enemies that you’ve never seen before, for example, the ghosts of long dead Sith opponents.

take from that what you will

thats an odd move surely, u would think multiplayer would be a big selling point for a game like that, i was gonna buy the Wii version anyway, after this i definetley will.

This strikes me odd. im not much of an online guy so this is not really making me anymore excited I was going to not buy this because they are using the same engine from the PS2 (so i assumed *the graphics are going to be the same*) until i read IGN's preview and they said the visuals look better than the PS2 version. Anyway i guess every verison has their own exclusive feature which will drive sales.

Slightly off topic, but not since some of you decided to contrast online implementations between the three consoles...

The one thing I love about Nintendo online is I don't have to listen to some child, teen or ignorant person who thinks they know something flap their lips. Even if I could mute them (which gets tiring if you play the game often), I prefer knowing that they know they're not berating me in any way. I could put up with WoW because we controlled the server, but in other cases it means I just play less or not at all such as with CS or TF2.

What I'd like to see Nintendo do is add persistence, storing my Mii as well as my progress in games online so that I could hop onto any other Wii and use my own hard earned achievements.

But then... this is me :)

Hum...interesting.  It does sound a little better than, say, Mass Effect side quests that add nothing to the story.  Or perhaps Oblivion, where losing a few quests wouldn't matter much.  I guess I'll have to wait for reviews on this one. 

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.

well, seems that it's not clear if the game will have online at all.....