By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Majin-Tenshinhan on 24 June 2009
Dno said:
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
The sheer ignorance from certain users in this thread (I will not name any names), on both sides I might add baffles me. One thing I want to make incredibly clear, since there seem to be lots of people who still haven't gotten it, the review written by Gamepro for The Conduit was purely unprofessional. Wii owners aren't even mad about the score, but the words. It was a terrible review that had no place in journalism of any kind. Trying to defend it is akin to trying to defend, say, a review of The Dark Knight where the reviewer immediately says that comic books are for kids and all suck, and then follows it up by saying that he's hated every actor in the movie for over 10 years.

It was not a good review. Stop going "oh lol yeah wii owners are mad cause their favored game isn't doing too well haha", no. It has nothing to do with that. A game for the Wii was unjustly judged and you'd all be saying the exact same words we are if the tables were turned. There is not a single doubt in my mind of that.

Not for me i LOVE Dynasty Warriors and buy everyone first day and they always get crapped on in the reviews..

Thing is theres not many games like DW.. but there are plenty FPS.. mab just mab this game sucked.... or was only ok. it currently has a 79 in the metric and all 5 of the reviews say it doesnt do anything that new. and a 80% is pretty freaking good now that i think about it so why are we complaining lol

 

 

Goddamnit. I apologize if I sound aggressive now, but please, read my post! The score is not the issue!



Around the Network
Samus Aran on 24 June 2009
CAL4M1TY said:

All consoles have biased reviews, it's not just the Wii and I don't believe the Wii gets it harder than any other console. Every console has it's set of disgruntled idiots just looking to cause a fuss (obviously they succeeded btw).

Firstly, I'm not trying to justify that bad Conduit review, I thought it was crap as well, I'm talking in general from this point onwards.

With the graphics in games, I would say the reason why Wii games get marked down in graphics isn't because they are unjustly compared with HD consoles. The reason is that, the difference between the average Wii game and the graphically best wii game of the day (SMG, MP3, even Zelda, take your pick) is alot bigger than the difference between the average HD game and the best looking HD game of the day on that system.

Sure Killzone 2 and Uncharted may look amazing, but I would not turn my nose down at Resistance (EDIT: Or even Army of Two, a game sitting at 79% on gamerankings), because I think it does an admirable job at looking like it's on the same playing field.
I could say the same thing about the 360 and it's games. I don't think I could say the same about the Wii for most of it's above average to great titles.

The better games on the Wii (NMH and De Blob as examples), do get marked in graphics, but that's because they (and seriously, NO ONE can dispute this) look piss poor graphically compared to the likes of Super Mario Galaxy and Prime 3. NMH's sandbox world is bascally barren. I don't mean to send NMH and De Blob into the firing line here, but you cannot honestly say they look comparable to the Wii's best (Even with colour, De Blob's buildings look bland and the same throughout most of the game, the only character the game has is the blobs themselves and the pesky police things).

So what I'm saying is, I believe that obviously developers tend to focus less on graphics on the Wii, which is fine for most Wii owners (I personally am not sure how I feel about it), but you have to understand that Reviewers have to review the whole game and one component (gameplay) can't make up for a lack of another (graphics).

There are plenty of HD games that get marked down low in the graphics section because they don't compare with the better HD games, it just so happens that it's usually the developers that are just trying to do cheap cash ins. On the other hand, you have the Wii, which has average graphics (for the Wii's capabilities) for both the shovelware and the good games. So obviously Wii's reviews compared to the HD consoles looks weak.

Again, I'm not justifying stupid conduit review guy, I'm just saying that there's a basis (I think) for why Wii games are marked down in graphics by reasonable reviewers and are driven into the ground repeatedly by the Bias ones. But I'd like to say it again, there's people out there that will nitpick games on every console, it's not skewed heavily against the Wii (imo).

This forum alone is enough to tell us that every console has it's detractors. Now if we could just get all of them to write reviews about opposing consoles, may OP wouldn't feel the same way.

Good post and you're right on most things, but I just see this stuff happening more on the wii then on any other console. 



dunno001 on 24 June 2009
  360 Wii PS3
A   X    
E    X  
I       X
O   X     X
U   X  X   X
Y   X  X  

 Okay, this graph will be used in this example, to indicate what it is that I have a problem with. All games in the chart are in the same genre. Conduit is a game that would fall into category E. The problem I have with the review is that it is being compared to A and I. Note that neither A nor I are in any way related to E. That's what annoys me. Game E would be comparable to any other iteration of game E (in this case though, none), or any other Wii game. Thus, a comparison of E to the Wii version of U or Y would be acceptable to me. But when talking about E, I don't want to hear about the 360 versions of U or Y, only the Wii version, since that is the one being compared.

To extrapolate, I'll now use Y. Game Y should NEVER be compared to I; it's a different game on a different console. If I'm talking about Y 360, it is fair to compare it other games on the 360 (A, E, O), or even other iterations of itself, to distinguish if it's a definitive game for the 360, or the definitive version of its own name. But if I'm talking about Y 360, E should never be mentioned. Feel free to discuss E when against Y Wii, though.

For those TL;DR people, if I have 1 system, I want to know how that game is for that genre on my system. If I have all the versions, which is the definitive one? Don't tell me about a different game on a different system.



-dunno001

-On a quest for the truly perfect game; I don't think it exists...

radha on 24 June 2009
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.


Idiotic, wait you mean deep imersive games are for idiotic poeple but stick waggling games are for smart people?

someone with a nervous tick can beat some wii games



dd if = /dev/brain | tail -f | grep games | nc -lnvvp 80

Hey Listen!

https://archive.org/details/kohina_radio_music_collection

HappySqurriel on 24 June 2009
radha 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.


Idiotic, wait you mean deep imersive games are for idiotic poeple but stick waggling games are for smart people?

someone with a nervous tick can beat some wii games

There are a lot of "Hardcore" games (JRPGs come to mind) that can be beaten by anyone with a pulse, and almost none where the easy or normal difficulty is hard enough to stop a 8 year old from completing the game ... Don't make assumptions that "Hardcore" games are anymore challenging than those Wii games you complain about



Around the Network
moondeep on 24 June 2009

OP is 100% correct. The HD systems get a free pass on things that the Wii games gets called to task for, and it's blatantly obvious.



Hardware is only a means to enjoy great games!

Samus Aran on 24 June 2009
radha 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.


Idiotic, wait you mean deep imersive games are for idiotic poeple but stick waggling games are for smart people?

someone with a nervous tick can beat some wii games


I guess pushing buttons requires you to have a higher IQ then? Seriously, all wii games I have don't use waggle.

 

Mario kart wii? Nope, wheel is pretty good, but I drive with the gc controller.

SSBB? Nope... And I use the gc controller for that one as well because wii controller eats batteries.

Metroid prime 3? GREAT control, nothing is waggle. 

Super mario galaxy? Doesn't use motion too much, it's fun to collect the star bits with the ir pointer and I like to waggle my controller to let mario spin. 

 

Play a wii game first before you insult the motion control on the wii. I also plan on buying metroid prime trilogy, the conduit, wii sports resort, red steel 2,etc all of which make good use of the motion on the wii. 

 



ZenfoldorVGI on 24 June 2009

Truth, you don't flame PSP games for not looking as good as a PS3, and you don't flame Wii games for not looking as good as the PS3. Technical graphics aren't nearly as important as artstyle and functionality, and technical graphic ratings are relative. The idiotic Gamepro review wasn't purposefully biased, Gamepro just always sucks, and has become completely irrelevant. Get your reviews from a notable source, not Gamepro. They have 30 year old women reviewing jrpgs over there. That is NOT representative of me, and their reviews are always horrendously and atrociously wrong on game that they don't take their lead from IGN on. Gamepro is the worst review source metacritic cites.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Cheebee on 24 June 2009
ZenfoldorVGI said:

Truth, you don't flame PSP games for not looking as good as a PS3, and you don't flame Wii games for not looking as good as the PS3. Technical graphics aren't nearly as important as artstyle and functionality, and technical graphic ratings are relative. The idiotic Gamepro review wasn't purposefully biased, Gamepro just always sucks, and has become completely irrelevant. Get your reviews from a notable source, not Gamepro. They have 30 year old women reviewing jrpgs over there. That is NOT representative of me, and their reviews are always horrendously and atrociously wrong on game that they don't take their lead from IGN on. Gamepro is the worst review source metacritic cites.

+1 for you. I completely and wholeheartedly agree with this.



Nintendo Network ID: Cheebee   3DS Code: 2320 - 6113 - 9046

 

peachbuggy on 24 June 2009

I personally thought reviews were a comparison of games ON THE SAME SYSTEM. If not, they should be. Otherwise some Wii games would instantly be downgraded points wise for graphics straight away. I agree with the OP. The Wii's strengths are based on motion control so if a game has good MC then it should get + points for that. So, does that mean reviewers should take points off HD games for no MC? Of course they don't. Nintendo usrd to be the darling of reviewers but not any more, ever since they brought out motion control. So my own personal opinion is that, before the review is even started, the Wii game in questio is docked some points. Bias? Well when you read some of the comments on the net by reviewers, i have to say yes.



DON'T WIN ME CHIBI BUDDY DON'T WIN ME.

ANIMAL CROSSING NEW LEAF FRIEND CODE:- 5129 1175 1029. MESSAGE ME.
ANDY MURRAY:- GRAND SLAM WINNER!

In my opinion the N64 was not just the best console of the 5th gen but, to this day the best console ever created!