When did "not as good as" an excellent game meant terrible? There's kind of a lot of room between those.

tbh, it's not even resident evil, you can put any other name on it and it'd be a bad game then, it's not like i haven't played it lol. at least the quicktime events would be easier with a wiimote though.

I have a 360 and didn't get it cause I thought the controls suxed.... really the only RE I played are RECV on DC then RE4Wii and UC on Wii, I never recalled the controls being so bad...

A Wii version with RE4 controls would be nice... then again I kinda want to not consider the game because of the "title screen wouldn't run on the Wii" comment.... (that and the fact that as good as RE can be, there are to many games of similar quality nowadays to cry over it).

Then why the "not as good" comment? It seems you think the game is bad on its own, not bad by comparison.

the game is bad on it's own is exactly what I typed.

RE5 is not a terrible game, in fact, is a great game, but RE5 is a terrible Resident evil. Good game is different from Good Resident evil, RE3 and RE4 are both things.

RE5 was a bad bad game, and a Wii-version would need a complete revamp and actually be scary

considering that the control is so outdated and just plain bad and the inventory system makes no sense, the good graphics didn't seem like much afterwards, at least for me. played it about 3 days straight with a friend then finally on the 3rd day, I randomly just tossed my DS3 on the sofa and took it back to gamestop and my reason was "this game sucks and is not worth my money." the guy looked at me like I was crazy but I didn't want to explain to him. I want a new RE for Wii, I don't want RE5, I don't trust Capcom's ports after Dead Rising.

"since it's not as good as RE4"

That does not mean "on its own".

the one after that.