Wait, so from what I gather is that this game doesn't look like a 360 or a PS3 game, therefore it's not going to be as good. Hmmm, that doesn't sound right. But wait, I forgot, everyone on the internet can judge a game buy looking at artifacted jpeg screenshots that were taken months before the current date, and not to mention even further from the actual release date of this game.

I love it how you can't excited for a game that doesn't have the graphical output of a PS3 or 360 game. Yeah, NO ONE is excited about Mega Man 9 or anything...

Congradulations if this game doesn't interest you, everyone who does, respects your opinion, but you don't need to make irrational statements like 'This game is gonna be like Red Steel', just because you are ignorant. This game is ambitious, and it lucky to even get this much attention, and yes, its only getting this much hype because its on the Wii. All that aside, the game offers a pleasing package to Wii owners, something that isn't avalible on the system currently. Whether or not it lives up to the hype is a question that will not be answered for some time. Please people, keep on eye on this game, don't discount it, or more importantly, don't overhype it.

As for the actual preview, it was pretty heinous. The credibility of it is equivalent to anyone of us looking at movies of the game on the internet and writing a preview for the game. 1UP didn't play the game, they watched it in unideal conditions, and their write-up was sloppy.

 "It can`t be compared to God of War 2."

Sure it can. I think it looks far better than GoW 2. Where did we say that though?

"Yeah, this game look like shit"

We said it looked slightly above average. People say it looks like SMG, but it doesn't.

"It looks worse than early Gamecube game."

I'm the only one who took in the Gamecube, and I used the (maybe) best looking GC game for the comparison. So nobody said this by any means.

 "High Voltage is the worst developer in the world"

No-one said this. We just said that they weren't Rockstar, Activsion or EA in quality.

"Some people lost it"

I totally agree.

Are you playing dumb or did you miss the joke? I took some non reasonable comments on this thred, extrapolated them and presented them in a sarcastic manner. And if you think this is slightly above average you have totally lost it. At least do some real criticism. The game may look unpolished in several areas, but it isn`t ugly.

I also doubt that you (or anyone else in this thread) have played a HV game. They are average (7), but I could see small bits of brilliance in all their games (Harvey Birdmann, LSL MCL, Family Guy). Show me any developer that can make similar quality games with limited budgets and time. Their licensed titles are much better than any EA game based on a movie.

And where did you take that EA and Rockstar make quality games?

<b>It doesn't look horrible, but there's no chance in hell it will look as good as anything on the 360, PS3, or PC, so why bother getting excited about that? I didn't buy the Wii or its games for graphics, I bought it for the controls.</b> Besides, if someone takes good screenshots it can do the game justice. Super Mario Galaxy made the game look far worse than it actually did, whereas Gears of War really showed the game off in its screenshots. Which brings us to the next paragraph.

Customizable controls? Fair enough, I'm sure the controls will be fine. But we've already had some nice shooters on the Wii so I don't see why this game excites people so much more than the last ones. As for the All-Seeing Eye, it sounds interesting, but if we're really saying that The Conduit bringing something similar to what we've seen four and a half years ago is exciting, color me unimpressed.

As for comparing it to other games on the Wii, yes, it's very impressive. I suppose if you lowered your standards to that level, then yes, it looks like it will be a very good game.

Extrapolate must be a very common word on this site, because no one seems to know its actual meaning anymore:

You must have some interesting powers if you're able to "extrapolate" a quote.

And you think that High Voltage is the only developer that works under tough conditions? Developers at EA, no matter how much money they have to work with, still work under time constraints. And let's see what ratings the games you listed got. Harvey Birdman got around 60% on all three platforms, and Family Guy did even worse (getting about 50% on the PS2 and PSP and a 57-58% on the Xbox). Small bits of brilliance make up for a complete lack of quality? Well, that's fine. Different strokes for different blokes.

And while I agree that EA doesn't make very high quality movie based games, there are still some good ones (especially the Lord of the Rings games) that could outclass most High Voltage games.

As for EA and Rockstar, EA isn't a great developer but they publish some pretty good games. And with Rockstar, they're definitely a good developer although they don't seem to put much effort into their Midnight Club series.

Are you playing dumb or did you miss the joke? I took some non reasonable comments on this thred, extrapolated them and presented them in a sarcastic manner. And if you think this is slightly above average you have totally lost it. At least do some real criticism. The game may look unpolished in several areas, but it isn`t ugly.

I also doubt that you (or anyone else in this thread) have played a HV game. They are average (7), but I could see small bits of brilliance in all their games (Harvey Birdmann, LSL MCL, Family Guy). Show me any developer that can make similar quality games with limited budgets and time. Their licensed titles are much better than any EA game based on a movie.

And where did you take that EA and Rockstar make quality games?