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

Forums - Nintendo - Capcom: "How many Nintendo games got online co-op?"

LordTheNightKnight on 22 July 2009

But they are going to include it in the next game. Nintendo has nothing to do with this... aside from making a system that allows developers to make these games at just a few million instead of $10-$30 million that even Valve has recently admitted to.

I still say a good game matters most.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
trestres on 22 July 2009

Capcom, ironically is bringing (I think) online co-op to the Wii in MH3, so my main grudge is with Capcom USA. They like to say more than they need to. That was an unneeded last line from Sven. The answer was reasonable until that last statement.

What does Nintendo have to do with Capcom not making certain types of games, it's hilarious. First they say they can't compete, but when given the chance they complain about having to be the first in doing it.

BTW I also intend to play the game, I think it will be a good, but short (according to IGN) game.



Proud poster of the 10000th reply at the Official Smash Bros Update Thread.

tag - "I wouldn't trust gamespot, even if it was a live comparison."

Bets with Conegamer:

Pandora's Tower will have an opening week of less than 37k in Japan. (Won!)
Pandora's Tower will sell less than 100k lifetime in Japan.
Stakes: 1 week of avatar control for each one.

Fullfilled Prophecies

LordTheNightKnight on 22 July 2009
trestres said:
Capcom, ironically is bringing (I think) online co-op to the Wii in MH3, so my main grudge is with Capcom USA. They like to say more than they need to. That was an unneeded last line from Sven. The answer was reasonable until that last statement.(1)

What does Nintendo have to do with Capcom not making certain types of games, it's hilarious. First they say they can't compete, but when given the chance they complain about having to be the first in doing it.(2)

BTW I also intend to play the game, I think it will be a good, but short (according to IGN) game.

1. Agree.

2. I just meant in this case. Capcom is simply doing what most smart developers do with new IPs. They work on making solid games and hope they sell. The sequels include more.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Pristine20 on 23 July 2009
trestres said:
Pristine20 said:
KungKras said:
outlawauron said:
KungKras said:
outlawauron said:
KungKras said:
Pristine20 said:
I don't know why people complain about not having online anything on wii. If you bought the wii for online play, you made the wrong purchase and it's your fault not capcom's...'nuff said.

BS. I bought the Wii because I wanted games like those that were on any other system only with Wii controls. There is NO excuse for third parties not doing regular games on Wii, none at all. Especially considering how easy it was for them to start making their games for PS1.

What is BS? Let's hear a defense!

Explain the Wii is a better alternative than PS3 or 360 for online play.

Since online is more or less a standard nowadays it's almost unthinkable that third parties won't follow that standard on the Wii. I don't have to argue that the Wii is better at online or anything, point still stands. When buying a Wii, it should be reasonable to expect games that support online in a similar fashion to games on other consoles. With Wiiconnect24, it can even be argued that Wii online has some advantages over the other systems (theoretically).

I agree completely. Online multiplayer/co-op is a standard of this generation, but I think Nintendo needs to take the lead and have everyone follow. (as it has been with the Wii)

I mean the biggest Wii title this year doesn't even have online multiplayer.

Agreed. Nintendo needs to improve the list of games that supports online, and third parties like Capcom needs to follow.

Thing is, the wii's online functionality is essentially a botch job. This was never a selling point of the console. If you want PS360 games, you'll have to get one of those consoles. If you want wii games, stick to your wii. Don't complain that the wii doesn't have capabilities of xbox live.Seriously, gamers these days complain about everything. You don't deserve "x" thing because you bought the "lead" console. I'm sick and tired of the boycotters and whiners. If "x" feature is not on your preferred console, get the console that has that feature. Don't buy oranges and expect apples to come packaged as a bonus.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the wii. I just don't pick one up and expect to get xbox live service..

No expects wonders from the Wii online service, but when the DS is capable of handling online coop, then you know somethings wrong, something called laziness.

Besides it wasn't the point of this thread, no one complains about the lack of online co-op, but the fact that third parties always find a reason not to make their games as good as they can everytime. Either Nintendo did it first or Nintendo never did it. Nintendo always loses.

You know, you can name any game and someone'll tell you something it lacks that could've improved it. That goes for ANY game be it 3rd parties, nintendo or any company. It's starting to look like you just want a reason to whine about capcom



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

LordTheNightKnight on 23 July 2009

Wait, this is about features third parties don't add? Shouldn't having more games period be more important first off and then get all the features?



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
outlawauron on 23 July 2009
LordTheNightKnight said:
Wait, this is about features third parties don't add? Shouldn't having more games period be more important first off and then get all the features?

I'd rather have a few fully featured titles that last me a while than have a flood of half-assed games.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

LordTheNightKnight on 23 July 2009
outlawauron said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Wait, this is about features third parties don't add? Shouldn't having more games period be more important first off and then get all the features?

I'd rather have a few fully featured titles that last me a while than have a flood of half-assed games.

I didn't write or even imply "half-assed".



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Gnizmo on 23 July 2009
BMaker11 said:

I know the Wii is capable of online co-op.......but nobody is implementing it (by nobody, I'm just using it as an exaggeration of 'not that many')! Looking at the library on the Wii, you see that not many games have online co-op, both already released and coming out soon. You look at the other consoles, and you see that a great plethora of their games have online co-op.

So what should you do? Continue to berate the unchanging pattern that's been for the Wii, or do you buy the alternative which gives you exactly what you've been asking for?

I know basic cable doesn't have 1000+ channels, but I don't complain that Comcast is stupid and should give me 1000+ channels for $49.99 a month. I get digital cable instead

No body was implementing it on the PS360 for a time either. I am too lazy to look up that time frame, but I am 90% certain it wasn't there at launch. So I guess no game should include it now? No, that is a stupid argument.

And what version of Spyborgs will have online co-op? Is it the PS3, or the 360 version of the Wii exclusive game? I always forget which one gtes clones of all the Wii games with online features. Its hard to keep up really.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

BMaker11 on 23 July 2009
Gnizmo said:
BMaker11 said:
 

I know the Wii is capable of online co-op.......but nobody is implementing it (by nobody, I'm just using it as an exaggeration of 'not that many')! Looking at the library on the Wii, you see that not many games have online co-op, both already released and coming out soon. You look at the other consoles, and you see that a great plethora of their games have online co-op.

So what should you do? Continue to berate the unchanging pattern that's been for the Wii, or do you buy the alternative which gives you exactly what you've been asking for?

I know basic cable doesn't have 1000+ channels, but I don't complain that Comcast is stupid and should give me 1000+ channels for $49.99 a month. I get digital cable instead

No body was implementing it on the PS360 for a time either. I am too lazy to look up that time frame, but I am 90% certain it wasn't there at launch. So I guess no game should include it now? No, that is a stupid argument.

And what version of Spyborgs will have online co-op? Is it the PS3, or the 360 version of the Wii exclusive game? I always forget which one gtes clones of all the Wii games with online features. Its hard to keep up really.

No, they weren't there at launch, but as time passed (a short amount of time actually), more and more games on the PS3 or 360 were getting co-op one after another, while the Wii still wasn't getting many.

Now we're here in almost Fall 2009 almost 3 years after the launch of the Wii, which is a good amount of time to see what's been going on....and now another 3rd party game with no online co-op comes out and you act surprised. If I had a Wii since launch and I wanted online co-op in games, and not that many had them....I'd just buy a cheap PS3 or 360 (well, maybe not a 360, I don't want it to die lol..it's $200 anyway) online. I wouldn't sit around and just wait for someone to FINALLY implement online co-op, all the while bitching out everyone else who hasn't.

It's kind of like (another PS3/360 analogy) the 360 getting all the exclusive JRPGs. Everyone thought that since the Playstation 3...was a Playstation 3, it was going to get all the JRPGs. Then the 360 kept getting them, exclusively, one after another. All us PS3 fans kept bitching, especially at Square, "The PS3 has the higher userbase in Japan, where your games REALLY matter" or "Playstation helped build your company and its' kinds of games, why're are you betraying your fans?" So what should someone do? Keep bitching that you're not getting something that you can get somewhere else RIGHT NOW, or buy a 360, and play Star Ocean, Lost Odyssey, Tales of Vesperia (NOW! not a year later), etc.?



Gnizmo on 23 July 2009

BMaker11 said:

No, they weren't there at launch, but as time passed (a short amount of time actually), more and more games on the PS3 or 360 were getting co-op one after another, while the Wii still wasn't getting many.

Now we're here in almost Fall 2009 almost 3 years after the launch of the Wii, which is a good amount of time to see what's been going on....and now another 3rd party game with no online co-op comes out and you act surprised. If I had a Wii since launch and I wanted online co-op in games, and not that many had them....I'd just buy a cheap PS3 or 360 (well, maybe not a 360, I don't want it to die lol..it's $200 anyway) online. I wouldn't sit around and just wait for someone to FINALLY implement online co-op, all the while bitching out everyone else who hasn't.

It's kind of like (another PS3/360 analogy) the 360 getting all the exclusive JRPGs. Everyone thought that since the Playstation 3...was a Playstation 3, it was going to get all the JRPGs. Then the 360 kept getting them, exclusively, one after another. All us PS3 fans kept bitching, especially at Square, "The PS3 has the higher userbase in Japan, where your games REALLY matter" or "Playstation helped build your company and its' kinds of games, why're are you betraying your fans?" So what should someone do? Keep bitching that you're not getting something that you can get somewhere else RIGHT NOW, or buy a 360, and play Star Ocean, Lost Odyssey, Tales of Vesperia (NOW! not a year later), etc.?

Online co-op is not an independant gameplay element. Its not like there is an online co-op genre the Wii is missing that the other systems are getting. It is a feature that is put into games. It is possible to do it on all systems. This is like waiting for a game to use rumble on the PS3. This is nothing like waiting for a JRPG on any console. Your comparisons are getting worse as we continue to argue. Do you even understand what you are saying? Or are you just randomly mashing keys on your keyboard?



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229