darthhomer said:

SteelAttack said:

Ravenprose said:

Iga_Bobovic said:

Castlevania 3

Oh yeah, I downloaded that game a week or so ago. I really need to get back into it again.

Game's too hard. When did I get fucking old?

When you became a father.

When Gaminggeek started licking your droopy ballz.

phantom_leo said:

SteelAttack said:

Must...touch...that...ass...
*licks monitor*

I've been playing Lost Odyssey, FIFA 09 multiplayer, and Halo 3 multiplayer as well.

^^^^ Hey GG, I think I found out where those white splotches on the Cammy pic came from. ^^^^

Are you sure Steel wasn't talking about Fedor ass?

I was playing Sam and Max season 1. Episode 2 is MUCH better than 1. And Animal Crossing, just got Gears of War 2. Expect bitching later in the week.

gamingeek said:

phantom_leo said:

SteelAttack said:

Must...touch...that...ass...
*licks monitor*

I've been playing Lost Odyssey, FIFA 09 multiplayer, and Halo 3 multiplayer as well.

^^^^ Hey GG, I think I found out where those white splotches on the Cammy pic came from. ^^^^

Are you sure Steel wasn't talking about Fedor ass?

Oops! My bad! The pic just took a long time to load.

phantom_leo said:

F'in Funny SNL Wii Skit HERE.

I like the way they change hand positions. So wrong though.

Yarcofin said:

Ravenprose said:

phantom_leo said:

F'in Funny SNL Wii Skit HERE.

gamingeek said:

Yarcofin said:

I seen a big burger like that a while back on the Food Network. Damn, now I'm hungry for a burger!

What's that yellow stuff on top?

BTW your Loontown residents are basically all shipping over. Everyone. Now I've got some pink pig. First it was grape ape, then Tabby, now pink pig. She has really cool items, a dice stereo thing, an apple TV and this weird podium with little dolls on. I got my DLC Chocolate heart on valentines day.

Ravenprose said:

Well, since I destroyed my town, they had to go somewhere else, I guess.

I'm thinking of nuking my town as well and start all over again.

Since I recuperated over the weekend I now have energy to continue the great Wii debate from last week.

Uh.... *looks back* Last week was 16 pages and I'm going all the way back to page 8 to find replies. Do I have the energy? I suppose.

Dvader said:

Well really good point GG, still lets take RE5 as an example. Sure the wiimote is better and controlling, you said add stuff like elebits, not sure how that will work with RE, even with a great physics model that model will be done better on one of the more powerful systems. They can add more enemies on screen (and they did) for RE5 on the new systems. They have online co-op something the wii would not do well. Its not just graphics, there all sorts of multimedia features that the wii is missing that helps the game. Hell just the fact that RE5 is in HD makes a world of difference. The hardware needs an update, the innovation is cool but they created this hole when they put out a GC again. They have half the equation, the other consoles have the other half, they need to come together.

Anyway saw Dead Space on Xbox, holy hell that looks amazing. GG you are correct, its basically the same game.

Midway bankrupt, awww.... who cares.

No, it wont be better on more powerful systems because on more powerful systems your physics interaction is press button A. An item is then sucked towards your screen, you then press another button and act as a passive observer while it shoots off and rebounds off things. (Half Life 2, Dead Space I am looking at you.) You can't rotate objects, pull things into and out of the screen and have direct and meaningful interaction with the gameworld compared to what you can do with the wii remote. This is the whole point, to integrate things you can only do on the system with the big franchises to push design. See what ISS has done with the new IR based gameplay, it's the biggest change football games have seen in a decade.

With RE4 style game on Wii you have a system that's twice as powerful as cube, meaning potentially better graphics than RE4, with more enemies, plus you use the IR for aiming - I haven't played the Wii edition of RE4 but the general consensus is that its aiming is far better than with a stick - plus the potential physics interaction.

What about a FPS that integrates Head-tracking? Something Wii can do with bundled set of plastic frame glasses for $5 extra? Or PS3 can do with a more expensive eye toy camera? That would be a revolutionary game design right there in perspective and immersion.

What about motion plus? That is out in a couple of months, think of what that can do? What if Team Ninja... oh Itagaki left. Did a Ninja Gaiden game with graphics better than Ninja Gaiden Black that used motion plus? Hell what if even without it they put some Wii Sports type stuff in it? Bowling? Yes, a ninja spiked ball that you could roll off into the distance to knock down assholes? Or a motion controlled massive ass club that acted like your racket in Wii sports? With the same nuance in power and angle that game gave you? How about a proper Star Wars game that used motion plus? 1:1 accurate force powers and lightsabre wielding? With graphics better than ninja gaiden black?

SEGA can do this?

And yet another company can't make an epic looking and playing RPG or adventure game? MH3 has huge environments too, as does Sky Crawlers.

Let's assume that Wii can't normal map whole environments (We Ski and Snowboard seems to do it for an entire moutainside) why can't you make an awesome Splinter Cell game with normal mapped characters? High Voltage can do it in the Conduit. Why not revolutionise Splinter Cell design? Have Metroid Prime 3 like first person interaction with consoles? Why not use motion plus or IR to dynamically choose how you interact with bad guys? Want to grab his ankle and up end him? Point to his ankle and pull. Want to choke his neck? Point the IR to his neck. No mutiple buttons, no menus, just instant satisfaction and dynamism. Hell give me a knife and let me hack at the back of his knees with motionplus. Or aiming with IR when sam takes out his gun?

Why do developers visions always include HD graphics and not thinking about all the ways they can push the actual design on Wii and yet still have good looking graphics? Does this look bad?

In the past, game developers optimised their code to get more on screen characters. I dont have exact figures but between Rogue Leader and Rebel strike the on screen tie fighter count went up from 150 to 300 roundabout. MP3 reportedly has 3 times the texture detail of 2. With the Wii being twice as powerful as cube you should be able to get RE4 + a lot more enemies.

Also you have games like MOHH2 which has an online mode with 32 players on Wii. You have Mario Kart with 8-12 online players. Even COD WOW has 4 player online, maybe 8 I haven't checked. It's not a good excuse anymore. Conduit has 16 players at once. With online you have your own machine rendering the environment and all that should be tranferred online is your data co-ordinates and other items in code form. For instance disregarding media the internet works by using written code in text that can load very fast.  

Let me just quote your words from the RE thread:

Dvader said:

RE4 though is on another level. Its a game that still amazes me to this day. Its the type of game you play and say "they can never top this".  

It's a GC game that still wows you TODAY. There is nothing stopping them from pushing the design, the visuals and the gameplay with a game on Wii which is more powerful than cube.

Archangel3371 said:

Well GG if it were a perfect world then every console would get the same quality of  attention but it's not. Unfortunately developers don't have infinite resources so they get allocated to where they see fit so if Capcom is satisfied with how they are allocating their resources to do the games they want to make then that's their right so I go to where I see the games I want and that was the 360. If they had made different choices then I would have either gone to a different system or done without, at least until I could get that system.

The thing is is that it's basically been like this all along in that one console usually gets the lion share of developer support. Developers have always typically wanted one thing and that's more powerful hardware whether that be more RAM, more processing power, etc. so things going like they are going should be no surprise. Sure the Wii may have surprised people by becoming so popular but that shouldn't mean developers have to throw more support to it.

This should have been quite clear when the specs and info for the Wii were first laid out. Nintendo's goal was to reach out to a new audience and they have been very successful with that. It wasn't only a gamble for Nintendo but it was also a gamble for gamers who picked up the system. If the Wii isn't satisfying someone's gaming style then frankly I think they should look to get another system that does. A 360 now is only $200 and sometimes you can get a deal to get it even cheaper. Also it will most likely see another price-cut sometime this year. When one picks up a system they always have to make choices and sacrifices because typically one system won't satisfy every gaming need they have.

Nintendos goal was to appeal to all people, and that includes gamers and it did so with its software catalogue, it hasn't been any less hardcore than it was on Cube. It's the 3rd parties which shafted the system from the off. Typically developers and importantly publishers have wanted their games to be as popular as possible, which meant putting games on the most popular system: PS1/PS2. The japanese can work within limitations while modern day western devs seem to act like they dont have the skills to make games on Xbox level hardware.

A system being popular does mean that it should see more support, there are more consumers there. Otherwise HD-DVD should be supported more and Blu-Ray ignored. Betamax supported and VHS ignored. We should be seeing heavy drama movies with budgets several times more than the most popular blockbuster movies. Okay extreme ridiculous examples there. The point is that Macs don't see more support than PCs etc. You get the picture. Seeing a majority of consumers choosing the direction and platform where they want to play their games and then seeing publishers saying "No, no, I think we'll just keep on doing this instead" is a joke to me. It's almost like they actively want the platform to fail. They haven't even tried.

You said before that you were someone who wanted to see all types of gamers and games catered for. Has that changed?

Look at this. Give me a reason why half the market should be completely ignored? Why a 26% 360 minority should get 5 times as many quality games than 57% of the market? Even adding PS3 to it you still come out with a majority on one side being ignored.

Microsoft was proud to point out that sales of Xbox 360 in January grew to 309K, a 33 percent year-on-year increase and a record for the month.

Greenberg insists that Xbox 360 is “mainstream,” and he may be correct, but perhaps it’s Nintendo in this generation that has the best understanding of the term. The Wii’s 679.2K sold is a 148 percent year-on-year spike. Nintendo boasted how while the total industry in January grew by $150 million, or 12 percent, the company’s own total sales grew by $300 million, “offsetting declines on other platforms.”

Speaking of declines, the PS3 to be the only home console to report a year-on-year unit sales decline for January. Unit sales for Sony’s flagship console dropped 25 percent.

Last gen you saw GC 3rd party support dropping, when its sales were only 18 mil, compared to Xbox's 22 mil. This gen the PS3 would logically be the platform receiving less support due to sales. Instead because the most popular platform is underpowered and because game budgets are so astronmically high, you are seeing them making builds on PC even. Last gen when did you ever see console developers doing high profile PC builds? It was only PC devs doing Xbox builds.

Every step of the way you've seen this system ridiculed as a gimmick, a fad, then the excuse was that 3rd party games dont sell. Every step of the way this console has defied the critics and gone on to beat out the competion and now the only excuse left is vision? When most developers can't even today match the best visuals on GC and Xbox on the system? That's BS on their part. Iga's post below brings up an important point:

Iga_Bobovic said:

So you go to the console with the bigger userbase, and you do not make BS PR excuses. Capcom is screwing over the Wii fanbase, by basically saying that Wii-owners should not complain. And least Epic is honest about it. They hate the Wii end of story. Developers care about money. That's the reason they went to the PS1 and PS2. If developers really cared about power, they would develop exclusively for the PC. Besides Wii is gaining in support, especially Japanese support.

I dont care if Epic or Bethesda say: we are focusing here, we dont feel that Wii fits with our design or what not. When publishers use the system as a dumping ground and dont try and make huge profits and then reinvest it in other systems (Hello Ubisoft) or PR Bullshit their way around (Hello Capcom and your 6 Wii ports). It's a joke. Iga is right too, if Capcom had wanted power they would have put Monster Hunter 3 on PS3. Why did they change? Because PS3 was dying a slow death in Japan and the most popular console was Wii and MH3 is a japanese franchise. It's got nothing to do with vision or features.

I should point out that last gen even though the GC missed out on tons of games, Black, Burnout 2 and 3, Psi Ops etc etc ad finitum. I did not complain once. It was logical to me, the GC sales were flagging so it was receiving less support okay fine. Now you have a console with unprecendented success and publishers are acting like they want it to die and developers are acting like elitist snobs.

edgecrusher said:

It is sad that the Wii doesn't get pushed to its potential...I'd like to see what it can truly do. You look at the games on the PS2, Xbox, or Gamecube that had FULL effort behind them to try and get the absolute most out of those machines----stuff like God of War 2, Far Cry Instincts, etc....then you think of how the Wii could very easily outclass these games with some effort put into it. It goes to show how a system's image can easily change based on the types of software put on it, and the effort put into them.

Exactly. I mean Ubisoft is terrible, out of all their franchises you would have thought that they would frigging throw a bone to the system and put Prince of Persia on the system, but no. Imagine if the only competition the game had at Christman on Wii was Animal Crossing - for all those annoyed at the winter Wii games.  

Punk Rebel Ecks said:

Pretty much 100% agreed.

Developers and especially consumers don't give a crap about power...at all, definably not in this day in age.

The PSP is getting its ass handed to it by the Nintendo DS even when most games don't even use the touch screen anymore. The PS3 is losing badly toward the 360 and Wii despite having the 3 best graphical games out there (Uncharted, Metal Gear Solid 4, and Killzone 2) that are only matched by one 360 IP (Gears of War). Oh and what about the Gameboy and Gameboy Color dominance? I love how the GameGear wiped the floor with the series until 2001 nearly a decade after it launched.

Consumers don't care about A.I., Anti-Analyzing, or HRD because they don't even know what those things are. Consumers just want fun and entertaining games that appeal to them. And what appeals to them is the system with the best image. I mean your talking of a consumer market that buys an average of 4 or 5 games per year.

Developers? I admit there are a fair share who care about tech, tell Kojima he should make Metal Gear Solid 5 on the Wii, but they are far viewer then most think. In reality tech has reached its plateau because all it can offer now is bells and whistles. Better A.I.? Seriously? A.I. is designed around the level progression and the enjoyment of the player hence why most games that aren't a shooter have A.I. about as advanced as a high end Nintendo DS game. Case and Point, Hey Edge tell me about the cutting edge A.I. "The Witcher" has. Physics? Again other then shooters what games use these to a significant degree? Most genres and games don't need to be high end. Yes they could use bigger maps and more detailed areas but many developers don't have the finances and at the end of the day most consumers don't care. I admit there are exceptions like Metal Gear Solid 4, Dead Rising, and Crysis but these games are far from the norm and are very few and far inbetween and as this generation progresses along it they only get fewer and further from each other.

You pretty much said all I could right there. In design terms most games could be done on Xbox, hell even some on DS. I played Max Payne on gba and it was pretty much the same thing Mass Effect could be done on DS. Yeah I said it. Of course I dont mean the same graphics etc. The design, over the shoulder 3rd person, either shooting or talking to people. Yeah it could. A fully featured GTA DS is about to launch to rave previews actually.

I'm playing the Darkness right now, there is nothing here in design that couldn't be done on lesser systems. Dead Space, I mean we had the revelation that it was in the works for the Xbox 1 three years ago. Looking at the video, it looks the same. Again, no reason it cant be on Xbox or Wii.

Some games yes the design just isn't feasible on Wii level hardware but its the genres with barely any progression and no reason whatsoever to NOT be on wii that annoy me. No Wii Virtua Tennis in o8 yet next gen versions? Its a tennis game, the design was set 10 years ago and the only kind of progression is extra modes (do able on Dreamcast) and beefing up graphics......... for a court and 2 characters? Fuck me, after Wii Sports Tennis, not one developer has the balls and skill to pull of a really GREAT tennis game on Wii? There's just no excuse when you have teams as talented as the Virtua Tennis team. Let's see what they can do with VT 09 and whether its half assed.

SFIV is another example, the producer himself said that there was "no reason" whatsoever that it couldn't be on Wii and that he would like to do it, they just............. aren't. Soul Calibur 4? SC2 sells best on GC, so Namco makes the great decision to go PS2 exclusive next? Then its design couldn't be done on Wii again? Why? Graphics? Online modes? The controls? 32 player online in MOHH2 says hello. Monster Hunter G bundled with classic controller in japan comes to mind.

Their alternative being a shovelware quality Soul Calibur Legends that their PR team try and pass off as a quality alternative?

Then you have port happy publishers dumping stuff. Capcom is up to 6 ports on this system. Six! 5 of them from last generation.

My problem is that publishers decided back in 2004/5 where their resources were going to go and in 2006 they decided that Wii Sports types games were all the system could handle, rather than looking at Zelda or Mario sales. They didn't support the system from the start and say, hey that's not working, they didn't even try. Their presumption from the start was: here, this is what the audience is getting from us - they defined the library themselves, they didn't try and actually see what the market would respond too.

END EPIC POST

SteelAttack said:

Ravenprose said:

Well, since I destroyed my town, they had to go somewhere else, I guess.

I'm thinking of nuking my town as well and start all over again.

Why would you do that? Your daughters characters would be erased too. All your items, everything.

Another bit of information for the 3rd parties game on Wii argument:

This is from an analyst on the gamastra piece.

Call of Duty: World at War did not sell quite as well as its predecessor in the United States during this crucial sales period for those two key platforms (PS3/360) - although it was relatively close.

Moreover, the results for the two platforms were mixed: sales for World at War were up on the PS3 compared to CoD4, while sales for World at War dropped on the Xbox 360 from the level set by CoD4.

Yet, Call of Duty: World at War on current generation consoles is still ahead of Call of Duty 4 during the analogous period, an impressive result for the Activision franchise.

The key here is the Wii version, which is known to have sold in excess of 366,000 units during December 2008 - there was no such Wii version of Call Of Duty 4.

The Wii version of World At War appeared at #19 on January's top 20 list, and these additional sales will no doubt encourage Activision to produce another Wii port for any future Call of Duty titles.

Basically there wasn't any growth for COD 5 over 4 on 360 and PS3, but WOW is tracking above that simply because there is a Wii version in existance, which there wasn't for COD4. For one month, selling 366'000 units of a 3rd party Wii game is pretty good, I hear Zack and Wiki total worldwide sales are only around that. And given that it may have cost only one third of the big brother versions, that's good. Sure it's not blowing out the other versions, but its little brother version of a hardcore multiplatform game. You would expect it to do well with the gamers who have played COD 1-4 before.

Ignoring sales stats like the 31 million selling 3rd party wii games, there are simply consumers who would prefer to play certain types of games on Wii. Ravenprose said a week ago how he had no interest in Dead Space, until a Wii version was announced. I pretty much try out each and every first person shooter on the system because of the controls. If there was no Wii version of Call of Duty World at War, I wouldn't have bought it, full. Stop.

I wouldn't buy Banjo Nuts and Bolts because of the vehicle making, it looks finnicky with a pad. If I could use the wii remote my opinion would completely change and I would think, ok that looks allright, just click and move the stuff about. Could be fun, I will try it out. So you see how simple things can completely change peoples decisions over whether to buy a game or not.