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

Forums - Nintendo - Biased reviews

Samus Aran on 24 June 2009

The one from gamestop. Like I said, it wasn't in those words, but that was what he wanted to say.

Really wii is current gen? Funny, those game journalists keep saying it's last gen. I guess it's only current gen when it suits your argument.

 

Ps: This isn't neccesarly directed to you. But why detract points for wii games because the wii can't do better? Doesn't make sense... You don't detract points of HD games because they can't do motion now do you?



Around the Network
Dno on 24 June 2009
Samus Aran said:
Dno said:
Samus Aran said:
I don't get a wow feeling while watching killzone 2, but I still get a wow feeling while playing metroid prime 1. Hmm, graphics mean nothing.


if you get a wow feeling LOOKING at MP1 and not Killzone 2 then your just a fanboy.. its a fact that killzone 2 looks better...

It is NOT a fact that graphics mean nothin because there are about 50 million xbox and ps3 owners who disagree and i am one of them. (not to metion PC owners)

I love looking at graphics thats why when the xbox was annouced i went out and bought a 4 thousand dollar HD TV complete with surrond sound. Just because the Wii does not support it doesnt mean it means nothing to everybody. May not mean anything to you but it means a lot to me.


That's just sad... I'm not a fanboy, killzone 2 looks great, I never said it didn't look great. I said I didn't get a wow feeling of the freaking grey world. Compare the design art of metroid prime to the one of killzone 2. Compare the atmosphere... Please do... Killzone 2 doesn't come close to the greatness of metroid prime in terms of that stuff. That's more important then how great the game looks in terms of technical graphics. I'm not a fanboy, I'm a fan, you look more like a fanboy to me. There are more then 500million people who disagree with you. The 50 million people owning a wii, 100 million people owning a ds and many more people who don't game. Yeah, I made a bad argument to make yours look even more bad. I'm THAT good.

ok then compare uncharted, heavenly sword, ratchet, mass effect, etc. colorful as hell.... doesnt matter what you compare all i am saying is that people like HD graphics and it can help the games score.. and i was a hardcore nintendo fan for 22 years and i beat MP1 and loved it and own every metriod since and the game is hot but it came out like 7 years ago it can not be compared to games that comes out now..

the last part i dont get what you mean but it seems it wont matter as you will not try to argue your point, you will try to tell me metriod primce on gamecube is a better game then killzone 2... lol



Carl on 24 June 2009
Samus Aran said:
The one from gamestop. Like I said, it wasn't in those words, but that was what he wanted to say.

Really wii is current gen? Funny, those game journalists keep saying it's last gen. I guess it's only current gen when it suits your argument.

Okay then... i give up.

360 is winning this gen. Wii is last gen, and in 2nd place too.

Geez, when are Ninty gonna join us this gen

Seriously though... you are just proving my point now about emos.

Get a grip, enjoy your console... and stop acting like a baby.



                            

dbot on 24 June 2009
Samus Aran said:
You said that you disagree with what I said about wii fps controls. Then all of a sudden you were talking about graphics. How does that defend your argument about dual analog being better then wii fps control? That's what I tried to say and I made a mistake in the post you quoted. I see that now. I hope you understand what I tried to say now :)

Sorry, I formatted my post incorrectly.  The part about graphics was not related to me disagreeing with your control comment.  The part about the graphics was a general thought about the topic.  



Thanks for the input, Jeff.

 

 

Samus Aran on 24 June 2009

I never said I didn't get a wow feeling from those games now did I ? I almost got an orgams of watching god of war 3 gameplay on E3.

Yes, metroid prime is a better game then killzone 2. And I don't see why that should be that surprising... From what I've seen so far of god of war 3 then I have to admit that the atmosphere is better then the one in metroid prime.

My last part explained: Your argument about how 50 million people like HD graphics isn't a very good one. That's why I made a counter argument that was as stupid to show you that yours isn't correct.



Around the Network
Dno on 24 June 2009
senortaco said:
Dno said:
senortaco said:
masterb8tr said:
Phoenix_Wiight said:
Yea, the more people that become idiotic "core" gamers, the more biased reviews will start to appear.

HD games, for the most part, on MOST websites get +5 points higher than Wii games just because they're HD.

It's balls annoying, but we gotta live with it.


well if a game has stunning visuals i think its fair to give it 5 points higher, in comparison to a game that looks like shit.


really this is suppose to ADD too the discussion? ...REALLY?


people have to get over that other people LOVE looking at graphics. Fact: graphics do add to the realism of the game which can (in some games) add to the fun.

Some people love graphics that the wii can not provide and in the graphics part of the review it SHOULD get a low score because people can purchase a better game with better graphics on another console.

Why should mario galaxy get the same score  in the graphics side as ratchet is crazy and maskes no sense. HD graphics do help games get higher scores because it takes time to make it look real and you have that wow factor in games like killzone2 , mass effect, ff13, uncharted etc. these games should NOT have the same score as wii games in the graphics part of the review.

A reviewer has to score, and compare the game to what is out there already. if i own killzone 2 then why would i want the next new FPS on wii? thats what the reviews scores are trying to say.

Also all reviewers rate Nintendo games basied anyway so its not just the HD consoles.

My thing is if you're comparing APPLES to APPLES then I'm fine with it. But when reviews compare High def graphics to Standard def who are the reviewers fooling? It's assumption that the person reading the review would have no clue that HD SHOULD look better then STD.

...To me a professional review should be Apples to Apples. Take the PS3 and KZ2, it was stunning on PS3, and comparing it to the previous visual stunnas' on the PS3 it can be argued that it's the best. I don't need the reviewer comparing it to what the 360 can do, PLENTY of fans of the system will do that. Thats really all I ask...

*whispers* good post Dno, thats the meat of the discussion I'm talkin bout...

See i love this you said what you think and why you think it should be that way... Samus Aran states that because he doesnt like it that means reviewers should not like it either. and that is stupid. i liked killzone 2 better then metriod because it looks good plus 32 player online matches trophies et.. the replay value is SKY HIGH compared to metriod. i like HD graphics and i want a game that looks good. And when i read a reveiw i want a reveiwer to tell me "hey this game looks like crap compared to W/E esle is on the market" or "this game looks awesome"

now to answer what you stated about apples vs apples i agree and you are right. But what you fail to see is that the wii is competeing for my time on my TV.. so is the PS3 and so is the 360... So i want to play the best things i can. SO he IS comparing apples to apples as the wii ps3 360 are all gaming systems. thats at least how i see it.



Samus Aran on 24 June 2009

So you're surprised that someone who's name is samus aran likes metroid more then killzone 2? Seriously, get a grip on your self.

Most people who own a wii, only own a wii, so they're not competing for your tv time. So, it's not fair to compare apple to a pear in this case. It may be fair in your case, but you're a minority. I hope you get what I'm trying to say. 

Anyway I said I got a wow feeling when I saw gameplay of god of war 3. I just didn't get that feeling with killzone 2. It's an opinion and you should learn to respect it.



HappySqurriel on 24 June 2009
dbot said:
HappySqurriel said:
dbot said:


 

So does that mean that every DS game should get 0 marks for graphics?

Should the XBox 360 and PS3 versions of games get docked marks because a high-end gaming PC can render the same game with higher detail and more advanced shaders at a higher resolution at a better framerate?

...

The truth is that videogames should be reviewed for what they are, not what they are not. Tiger Woods for the PS3 and XBox 360 should not have critical reviews because the dual analogue controller can not match the experience of playing Tiger Woods on the Wii. People read reviews because they want to know how good a game is for a platform they own, they really don't care how it stack up against games they can't play on a platform they don't own.

I am having trouble following your logic.  The graphics of a DS game should be compared with other games on handheld platforms, the graphics of a current generation console game should be compared with other games available on current generation consoles, and pc games should be compared to other games offered on pcs.  

What makes it fair to consider a different game on the PS3/XBox 360 when you look at a Wii game, but it isn't fair to consider the same game on the PC when you look at a PS3/XBox 360 game? The only thing that justifies protecting the HD consoles from the PC is that the PC is more expensive and has a different control set-up ... Wait a minute, weren't the HD consoles (basically) twice the price of the Wii at launch and don't they have a different control method?

 



dbot on 24 June 2009
HappySqurriel said:
dbot said:
HappySqurriel said:

I am having trouble following your logic.  The graphics of a DS game should be compared with other games on handheld platforms, the graphics of a current generation console game should be compared with other games available on current generation consoles, and pc games should be compared to other games offered on pcs.  

What makes it fair to consider a different game on the PS3/XBox 360 when you look at a Wii game, but it isn't fair to consider the same game on the PC when you look at a PS3/XBox 360 game? The only thing that justifies protecting the HD consoles from the PC is that the PC is more expensive and has a different control set-up ... Wait a minute, weren't the HD consoles (basically) twice the price of the Wii at launch and don't they have a different control method?

 

So I guess you support my statement that all reviews should include the phrase "for a Wii game."  Maybe reviewers should grade the Wii graphics on a PS2/original Xbox scale.  

Maybe we should include PC sales in the console gaming charts?  

 

Edit:

Let's not forget the fact that 99% of all of the Conduit hype threads referenced it's graphics.  Some people went so far as to say the Conduit looked like a 360 game.  I am all for changing the standard for the Wii.  We will just know that a graphical 10 on the Wii would be below average on the 360.



Thanks for the input, Jeff.

 

 

Samus Aran on 24 June 2009

Maybe we should detract 3 points of all HD fps because of dual analog while we're at it?

Why do you fail to understand that design art is more important? And let's not forget the atmosphere...