Be interesting to see how this sells in Japan. Baseball is rather big over there, but this just doesn't seem to be a quality baseball title.

ItsaMii said: I do not care about Mario Sluggers, but I care even less for Famitsu. They scored FF XII 40/40. Reviews like that are destroying gaming as we know it.

Well, I would understand if u where using nintendogs in your example, but FF12!!!!!! I mean, even if u dont like it its pretty obvious that its a game that really deserves high scores.

 

@DTG

You said that Nintendo's business direction was sensible from a stockholders point of view.

That is all it has to be. If it did not sell -- and Mario Sluggers was a million seller on the Gamecube even though it was released late in the system's life -- then it would not make money and the stockholders would not be happy. That's business.

You might not like the Mario sports model. But I prefer it to the EA/2K model where you shell out full price each year for basically new rosters and the addition of a useless feature or a minor (and sometimes irritating) tweak. Also, in this age of multi-million dollar budgets, all software companies are using spinoffs and sequels to ensure success. So if you are going to be critical of Nintendo, be sure to do it to just about everyone else as well.

Mike from Morgantown

PS -- How about a rail against Sony's GT5 Prologue. A $40 demo of a sequel.

mike_intellivision said: @DTG You said that Nintendo's business direction was sensible from a stockholders point of view. That is all it has to be. If it did not sell -- and Mario Sluggers was a million seller on the Gamecube even though it was released late in the system's life -- then it would not make money and the stockholders would not be happy. That's business. You might not like the Mario sports model. But I prefer it to the EA/2K model where you shell out full price each year for basically new rosters and the addition of a useless feature or a minor (and sometimes irritating) tweak. Also, in this age of multi-million dollar budgets, all software companies are using spinoffs and sequels to ensure success. So if you are going to be critical of Nintendo, be sure to do it to just about everyone else as well. Mike from Morgantown PS -- How about a rail against Sony's GT5 Prologue. A $40 demo of a sequel.

That may be business but from a gamers point of view I could care less about Nintendo's stockholders. What I care about is the product they deliver to me and whether or not it is profitable doesn't in itself validate my purchase -rather the games value does. The investment that goes into these titles does not justify a price tag on par with titles such as Galaxy or TP.

Also the age of multi million dollar budget effects MS and Sony more than it does Nintendo considering games for HD systems cost multiple times more to develop.

I am critical about Sony and MS and especially the abundance of cookie cutter FPS games being churned out at the rate of pop soda however this thread pertains to Nintendo and it would be besides the point to drag others into this debate.  

DTG said: mike_intellivision said: @DTG You said that Nintendo's business direction was sensible from a stockholders point of view. That is all it has to be. If it did not sell -- and Mario Sluggers was a million seller on the Gamecube even though it was released late in the system's life -- then it would not make money and the stockholders would not be happy. That's business. You might not like the Mario sports model. But I prefer it to the EA/2K model where you shell out full price each year for basically new rosters and the addition of a useless feature or a minor (and sometimes irritating) tweak. Also, in this age of multi-million dollar budgets, all software companies are using spinoffs and sequels to ensure success. So if you are going to be critical of Nintendo, be sure to do it to just about everyone else as well. Mike from Morgantown PS -- How about a rail against Sony's GT5 Prologue. A $40 demo of a sequel. That may be business but from a gamers point of view I could care less about Nintendo's stockholders. What I care about is the product they deliver to me and whether or not it is profitable doesn't in itself validate my purchase -rather the games value does. The investment that goes into these titles does not justify a price tag on par with titles such as Galaxy or TP. Also the age of multi million dollar budget effects MS and Sony more than it does Nintendo considering games for HD systems cost multiple times more to develop. I am critical about Sony and MS and especially the abundance of cookie cutter FPS games being churned out at the rate of pop soda however this thread pertains to Nintendo and it would be besides the point to drag others into this debate.

From another gamer's point of view, I like the nintendo model; if I am looking for a sports game, I can get
1) a realistic sports game, that I probably won't find to be fun because I don't wanna have to deal with trades and stats and all that jazz,
2) a dumbed-down experience that probably sucks, or
3) A mario Sports experience that, while 'dumbed down' in that it isn't #1, is almost certainly better than#2. 

I would go for #3 all the time.  It's not that there are not other similar games out there; it's that throughout the years Nintendo has kept their Mario Sports brand fun and well made and *not* whored out.

An example: My most-played games (by time) in life are Tetris, Freecell, and Mario Tennis 64.  Mario Tennis 64 is pretty much the definition of a dumbed-down tennis game; the entire game can be played with 1 button + analog stick if you want, there's no career mode worth mentioning, the differences between characters is minimal at best, etc.

So why do I play it so much? Because even today it's a hell of a lot of fun.

And with only 2 console iterations in the last 8 years, I fail to see how that is more whored out than any other sports game out there.

So how about you get your head out of your ass and admit that maybe some gamers would put more value in a $50 Mario Sports game than they would in a $50 Mario Galaxy or Twilight Princess? Hell, I have probably played more Mario Tennis 64 since I got my Wii than I have played any other game... although (maybe)Okami and (definitely)TWEWY are going to change that in the near future.

Come on. It meant to not be a masterpiece. I mean, how many Mario sports games are? Besides Mario Tennis for the N64, and a few others.

JGarcia050 said: *bleu-ocelot* said: Do they have a Mario BasketBall? That would be a hit. one of the worst games i ever played.

 

Impossible. Really, you take such "more popular" games for granted, until you play Dora Saves the Mermaids, imagine: Figure Skating, DinoMaster, and the trillions of utter shit that exist in the gaming world. But hey, if it's one of the worst games "YOU'VE" ever played, then I guess you truly haven't played a lot of bad games. If it has the name of a popular franchise embedded on it, it's better than trillions of crap that exist. Except Superman 64.

Wii Sports average review = 76%

Don't believe the hype. 

Wii Sports is more like a tech demo than a game.

a.l.e.x00 said: Wii Sports is more like a tech demo than a game.

 That's what people like to say, but can a mere tech demo be a massive system seller?