By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Wii Game Selection = Lose/Lose/Lose/Lose/Lose/Lose/Lose Situation

LordTheNightKnight said:
Red4ADevil said:
From what im seeing developers are ignoring the core fanbase on the wii and only focusing on the casual audience. Its good that these develoepers are making titles for the casual demographic they just cant ignore the core base or they will lose respect/faith from gamers, the masses and also potential profit. Just because the wii is so cheap for making software doesnt mean you cant fork over some money to make a good game. It dissapoints me to see games like RE4 and Star Wars Rogue Squadron looking better than any of these third party wii titles.

Or Twilight Princess, which was actually criticized for not having the graphics updated on the Wii version. 


Yeah that one too but if they did that then they could have angerd gamers because they had to delay it again. At least we will get another zelda title for the wii because TP was for GameCube originaly.



Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight said:
Red4ADevil said:
From what im seeing developers are ignoring the core fanbase on the wii and only focusing on the casual audience. Its good that these develoepers are making titles for the casual demographic they just cant ignore the core base or they will lose respect/faith from gamers, the masses and also potential profit. Just because the wii is so cheap for making software doesnt mean you cant fork over some money to make a good game. It dissapoints me to see games like RE4 and Star Wars Rogue Squadron looking better than any of these third party wii titles.

Or Twilight Princess, which was actually criticized for not having the graphics updated on the Wii version.


I never really understood that as the game looked fantastic to me.



Red4ADevil said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Red4ADevil said:
From what im seeing developers are ignoring the core fanbase on the wii and only focusing on the casual audience. Its good that these develoepers are making titles for the casual demographic they just cant ignore the core base or they will lose respect/faith from gamers, the masses and also potential profit. Just because the wii is so cheap for making software doesnt mean you cant fork over some money to make a good game. It dissapoints me to see games like RE4 and Star Wars Rogue Squadron looking better than any of these third party wii titles.

Or Twilight Princess, which was actually criticized for not having the graphics updated on the Wii version.


Yeah that one too but if they did that then they could have angerd gamers because they had to delay it again. At least we will get another zelda title for the wii because TP was for GameCube originaly.


That was why the criticism of that was bullshit. They completely ignored that fact. 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

dib8rman said:

To prove it I rated Alien Syndrome on gamefaqs (4/10) and mentioned ubisoft is dead to me.

 Uh, I'm pretty sure Alien Syndrome is a Sega game.



TP is an excellent example of lazy porting and setting the trend. Great game but they could have done more. In the end however I still say it is unecesary. There are plenty of games that are good and make use of the unique features of the Wii. It could be better but the same could be said of anything. Nintendo, and third parties, are doing a good job of differentiating themselves from the competition.

We keep buying the games.

(Alien Syndrome is a Sega game, and it is a horrible game with an awesome control scheme.) 



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Around the Network
Words Of Wisdom said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Red4ADevil said:
From what im seeing developers are ignoring the core fanbase on the wii and only focusing on the casual audience. Its good that these develoepers are making titles for the casual demographic they just cant ignore the core base or they will lose respect/faith from gamers, the masses and also potential profit. Just because the wii is so cheap for making software doesnt mean you cant fork over some money to make a good game. It dissapoints me to see games like RE4 and Star Wars Rogue Squadron looking better than any of these third party wii titles.

Or Twilight Princess, which was actually criticized for not having the graphics updated on the Wii version.


I never really understood that as the game looked fantastic to me.


To me i dont see how much more imporvement could have been done since it has artistic graphics (which puzzels me on how the next zelda game is going to look. I was still amazed though, i loved the detail in Gannondorf he looked even more evil



steven787 said:

TP is an excellent example of lazy porting and setting the trend. Great game but they could have done more. In the end however I still say it is unecesary. There are plenty of games that are good and make use of the unique features of the Wii. It could be better but the same could be said of anything. Nintendo, and third parties, are doing a good job of differentiating themselves from the competition.

We keep buying the games.

(Alien Syndrome is a Sega game, and it is a horrible game with an awesome control scheme.)


Excellent example? That is just bullshit. Lazy implies they have plenty of time and resources, but didn't use them. The game was delayed TWO AND A HALF YEARS after footage was first shown (mid 2004 - late 2006), and I recall hearing it was one of the most expensive games Nintendo had ever made.

So don't go calling a development team lazy for not doing extra work, when they were already being taxed.

Twilight Princess was not a lazy port. You criticts of the game's graphics are lazy for not doing the damn research. 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

LordTheNightKnight said:
steven787 said:

TP is an excellent example of lazy porting and setting the trend. Great game but they could have done more. In the end however I still say it is unecesary. There are plenty of games that are good and make use of the unique features of the Wii. It could be better but the same could be said of anything. Nintendo, and third parties, are doing a good job of differentiating themselves from the competition.

We keep buying the games.

(Alien Syndrome is a Sega game, and it is a horrible game with an awesome control scheme.)


Excellent example? That is just bullshit. Lazy implies they have plenty of time and resources, but didn't use them. The game was delayed TWO AND A HALF YEARS after footage was first shown (mid 2004 - late 2006), and I recall hearing it was one of the most expensive games Nintendo had ever made.

So don't go calling a development team lazy for not doing extra work, when they were already being taxed.

Twilight Princess was not a lazy port. You criticts of the game's graphics are lazy for not doing the damn research.


It was a lazy port, they spent two+ years perfecting it for Gamecube and then rushed it for the Wii launch. Lazy is describing how the outcome appears compared to the version it is ported from, not the overall project or how much work actually went into it. It set a precedent in the sense that other developers saw it and copied the idea of "just add waggle"

We don't know how much work goes into these games a game can take five years with 100 staff members but they might have been working on ten other games at the same time or just be slow. A game could have twenty staffers and put it out in 6 months, but maybe they are more efficient workers with only one project and 75 hour work weeks.

Edit: but after rethinking it, in the case of Z:TP I over stated, I am sorry. I still think it set the trend for other developers though.

And Rol, the last comment was hilarious.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

I know Alien Syndrome is a sega game, (Actually Totaly Games is the dev team I believe) I forgot to add that; at the bottom of the review I posted a series of devs and publishers that were either On Notice or Dead to me.

Ubisoft is and since then has been dead to me
Sega is on notice
and
Totally Games is on notice.

the review was at gamefaqs, but either way Alien Syndrome gave me a human syndrome. Plus my point is I spazzed first =) It is kind of sad that it's 2008 and this is happening, they did kinda have since 2006 to learn how to manipulate the hardware and come to some at least rational conclusions on the market...

Oh well. Going to add that to my sig,

Proud to be the First Ubih8r. (Of course I probably wasn't really the first =(... )



I'm Unamerica and you can too.

The Official Huge Monster Hunter Thread: 



The Hunt Begins 4/20/2010 =D

steven787 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
steven787 said:

TP is an excellent example of lazy porting and setting the trend. Great game but they could have done more. In the end however I still say it is unecesary. There are plenty of games that are good and make use of the unique features of the Wii. It could be better but the same could be said of anything. Nintendo, and third parties, are doing a good job of differentiating themselves from the competition.

We keep buying the games.

(Alien Syndrome is a Sega game, and it is a horrible game with an awesome control scheme.)


Excellent example? That is just bullshit. Lazy implies they have plenty of time and resources, but didn't use them. The game was delayed TWO AND A HALF YEARS after footage was first shown (mid 2004 - late 2006), and I recall hearing it was one of the most expensive games Nintendo had ever made.

So don't go calling a development team lazy for not doing extra work, when they were already being taxed.

Twilight Princess was not a lazy port. You criticts of the game's graphics are lazy for not doing the damn research.


It was a lazy port, they spent two+ years perfecting it for Gamecube and then rushed it for the Wii launch. Lazy is describing how the outcome appears compared to the version it is ported from, not the overall project or how much work actually went into it. It set a precedent in the sense that other developers saw it and copied the idea of "just add waggle"

We don't know how much work goes into these games a game can take five years with 100 staff members but they might have been working on ten other games at the same time or just be slow. A game could have twenty staffers and put it out in 6 months, but maybe they are more efficient workers with only one project and 75 hour work weeks.

And Rol, the last comment was hilarious.


Lazy

1 a: disinclined to activity or exertion : not energetic or vigorous

b: encouraging inactivity or indolence <a lazy summer day>

2: moving slowly : sluggish

3: droopy, lax <a rabbit with lazy ears>

4: placed on its side <lazy E livestock brand>

5: not rigorous or strict <lazy scholarship>

 

Neither of those has to do with the outcome of work. The team was working their asses off to have the game completed in time for the Wii launch. You don't have any grounds to call the result lazy, because there is no defintion of lazy that has to do with results.

 

And setting a precedent doesn't count either. The developers only looking at the waggle part of the game, makes THEM the lazy ones. Lazy isn't defined as the cause of  laziness in others. Their laziness is the laziness.

So it's still bullshit to call it a lazy port. Your grounds are not part of the definition, and the work they put into it makes it not even the real definition. 

 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs