Support NeoGAF

[DDayton]

For those that are unfamiliar with some of the shovelware in development for Wii, here's a scan from a folder at the Leipzig Games Convention:
http://i20.tinypic.com/2v3pv81.jpg

1) Do we have proof these wouldn't appear on another system? Does MS have "this game is too lousy in gameplay to allow", or just "must be of ___ resolution"?

2) If these are released as -budget- titles, I don't see the problem. They might be odd little $20 purchases...

I'm a tad more tolerant of stuff like this, as the occasional "weird gem" can sneak through if you don't try to filter out everything. The market will adjust, I'd think...

 

[Thomper]

1) Do we have proof these wouldn't appear on another system? Does MS have "this game is too lousy in gameplay to allow", or just "must be of ___ resolution"?

2) If these are released as -budget- titles, I don't see the problem. They might be odd little $20 purchases...

I'm a tad more tolerant of stuff like this, as the occasional "weird gem" can sneak through if you don't try to filter out everything. The market will adjust, I'd think...

No, I think a decent amount of those games are PS2-ports. At least, I've seen stuff like Ninjabread Man on the shelves for Europe once before.

Sony doesn't really seem to have an approval process here in Europe either, because 99% of the early shovelware coming out for Wii now are ports of PS2-games. Look on the lower shelves for PS2 and you'll see plenty of awful games from Phoenix and many other publishers.

 

[FieryBalrog]

From the hardcore perspective there is a huge amount of crap on Nintendo systems, probably more than on MS and current Sony hw, but all this proves is the huge gulf in tastes between this audience and the mass market.

Many hardcore gamers, especially the gaming media, continue to be utterly clueless to the very clear fact the mass market have completely different tastes. This happens to a level where even if a game is loved by both audiences the reasons are different.

In the same way fanatics laud accolades over TV shows like Heroes and 24 and laugh at American Idol, they lack the simple insight to realise people have different opinions about things.

In short, we don't get it, and never will. Nintendo is running a business and declining titles which people buy and enjoy because of a subjective view of what constitutes good, from a group the game isn't aimed at, is retarded.

I mean, come on, you only have to look at the hardcore/gaming media reaction to Wii Sports to realise how fuck me out of touch they are with reality! :lol

What does this have to do with being out of touch with reality? So now I can't think American Idol sucks balls because millions of people happen to love crap like that, because that would be "out of touch with reality"?

Maybe you don't get it, but speak for yourself please.

 

[Linkhero1]

1) Do we have proof these wouldn't appear on another system? Does MS have "this game is too lousy in gameplay to allow", or just "must be of ___ resolution"?

2) If these are released as -budget- titles, I don't see the problem. They might be odd little $20 purchases...

I'm a tad more tolerant of stuff like this, as the occasional "weird gem" can sneak through if you don't try to filter out everything. The market will adjust, I'd think...

1)Some of them are ports from PS2
2)They are budget titles

 

[nightez]

You decide.

The N64 still has the best covers ever

 

[Linkhero1]

The N64 still has the best covers ever

Yeah I like a lot of the cover arts from the N64.

 

[AlternativeUlster]

Yeah I like a lot of the cover arts from the N64.

That looks like a Nintendo Power envelope.

 

[Infernal Monkey]

1)Some of them are ports from PS2
2)They are budget titles

I think all of them are PS2 ports. Stuff like Ninjabread Man and Hamster Heroes have been out for like two years now. Also some of these are officially Phoenix Games shit under a new publisher (all the 'Kidz Sports' games). America will experience THE JOY!

The first wave of Wii Popcorn Arcade titles showed up here last week. Game were making a huge deal out of them, even going as far as putting them in the front window. True story. ;_;

 

[Linkhero1]

That looks like a Nintendo Power envelope.

couldn't find a nice one that was small.

I think all of them are PS2 ports. Stuff like Ninjabread Man and Hamster Heroes have been out for like two years now. Also some of these are officially Phoenix Games shit under a new publisher (all the 'Kidz Sports' games). America will experience THE JOY!

The first wave of Wii Popcorn Arcade titles showed up here last week. Game were making a huge deal out of them, even going as far as putting them in the front window. True story. ;_;

They probably are...I really haven't been keeping up with most of the crap titles.

 

[CassSept]

Wow, this Phoenix game reminds me of
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mB1zWEhgrLs
:lol

 

[Boerseun]

LOL EGM is so full of it.

Anyone who has been reading the mag for the past 10-15 years will tell you these guys were the ones who complained non-stop about how "Nintendo kills games, they control what we can and cannot play, their standards are too ridiculous" wah wah wah...

When PSX had crap out the wazoo and Xbox was certifying every generic PC port possible to get more games (including trash like Azurik), this was OK, but now Nintendo disbands its internal game approval team because of the existence of ESRB and would rather let the market decide, suddenly they aren't enforcing "standards" enough.

It's funny because EGM then talks about how Sony "supports" their developers and doesn't "kill 2d games" when we KNOW, documented fact, that Sony has routinely killed several 2d games because they didn't feel it was "next-gen" enough.

Typical game journalist hypocricy for the mega-win.

Bottom line:

EGM wants Nintendo to oversee what games get released, isn't it better if they let the consumers decide? If people spend 50 bucks on a game and feel hosed, they shoulda done the research and rented first. No random standards from Nintendo are going to change idiots from being idiots, and moreover, if games really suck retailers won't carry it.

Now as far as Nintendo ENCOURAGING top quality game developers to spend time and create new games for the Wii, they definitely need to be doing that (and it doesn't seem like they have been successful). But placing controls on their platform and restricting game developer output, well, that is a bad idea, and we will very quickly go back to the old Nintendo where censorship and content control was prevalent.

Dude, EGM is generally acknowledged for being crap. No need to get so worked up about it.

 

[MisterHero]

I remember when Nintendo WAS assuring quality control (and even then a few turds still got through), but upon recalling videogame history, media like EGM will also likely regard them as 'monopolistic tyrants' during the NES and SNES era.

 

[KINGMOKU]

Wow, apparently nobody's read the article. Talk about jumping to premature conclusions. Brief summary:

- Seems all you need is money to buy a license to publish on Wii and DS.
- Getting a game approved by Sony and Microsoft is tougher. They try to enforce a minimum quality standard. BAD GAMES DO SLIP THROUGH, yes. Nintendo does not enforce this quality standard at all, however. Not anymore, at least.
- A lot of shovelware is being brought to Nintendo platforms to make a quick buck. Flash-based web games are being ported and sold on the Wii and DS.

AND POSITIVE POINTS THEY MAKE IF YOU THINK EGM "JUST HATES NINTENDO":

- As much as shovelware sucks, it may actually be an indicator of a healthy platform
- EGM is concerned that Nintendo's reputation may be sullied by terrible 3rd party software and they call Nintendo out to enforce better standards for games
- On a final note, they remark that regardless of the 3rd party situation, Nintendo's 1st party software will always be high quality

Whoops. Looks like you people spewing out a lot of sensational ballyhoo don't know what you're talking about.

This is a load of crap. The headline is sensational, and the "Wii crap" tag on the cover sums up how 1up/EGM feels about the Wii, and Nintendo as a whole.

The only point that needs to be argued is wether or not 1UP/EGM is even considered journalism. I for one think its not.

 

[Cosmozone]

EGM, lol.

 

[jetpacks was yes]

Wow, apparently nobody's read the article. Talk about jumping to premature conclusions. Brief summary:

- Seems all you need is money to buy a license to publish on Wii and DS.

Does the article actually state that? That's misleading, because you do have to be an established developer, and indies have to prove that they can make professional-quality work. So it's just as false as their rumor that WiiWare games will "be the size of 16-bit oldies". What was the largest SNES game, 32 Mb? That's under 4MB. I don't know how EGM came up with that.

 

[ziran]

What does this have to do with being out of touch with reality? So now I can't think American Idol sucks balls because millions of people happen to love crap like that, because that would be "out of touch with reality"?

Maybe you don't get it, but speak for yourself please.

You should try actually reading my post before responding, it does help.

The mass market doesn't take entertainment as seriously as the fans, i.e. people on this board. They don't look for the same things and have different criteria for enjoyment. This is why the hardcore and gaming media have been consistently clueless about the sales potential of games like Nintendogs and Wii Sports. They don't understand what the mass market wants, myself included.

Hardcore gamers, especially the gaming media are out of touch with the reality of mainstream opinion when they say things like, 'why does this system have all this crap on it', because they fail to realise some people will enjoy this so called 'crap'. Often a much bigger audience than the vocal minority of hardcore gamers criticising!

Obviously I wasn't saying condemning individual opinion, which you would have realised had you read the post, I was saying hardcore gamers and the gaming media have no concept of what constitutes quality or enjoyment for the mass market, which is obvious when you go into any sales thread.

Had a small amount of thought gone into the question, 'why is there so much crap on this hugely popular mass market system', the answer would've been so obvious the question wouldn't have been asked.

 

[Joust Williams]

The Wii has a higher percentage of crap games than any full-sized console I have ever seen. Bar none. I know that people compare it to the PS2, but the PS2's percenage of bad games isn't complete ass. Looking at Gamerankings, the PS2 has 200 titles (the max that it will show) at 82.7% or over. The Wii has FOUR. I doubt there are fifty times as many PS2 games. Meanwhile 19 of the 47 Wii tiles reviewed are 70% and under. Compare that to 360's 46/159 (a much lower percentage).

 

[Threi]

The Wii has a higher percentage of crap games than any full-sized console I have ever seen. Bar none. I know that people compare it to the PS2, but the PS2's percenage of bad games isn't complete ass. Looking at Gamerankings, the PS2 has 200 titles (the max that it will show) at 82.7% or over. The Wii has FOUR. I doubt there are fifty times as many PS2 games. Meanwhile 19 of the 47 Wii tiles reviewed are 70% and under. Compare that to 360's 46/159 (a much lower percentage).

Try comparing the first 100 games to come out for the system. I think that would be pretty interesting to see (not that i am doubting you or anything, just curious)

 

[Captain Glanton]

The Wii has a higher percentage of crap games than any full-sized console I have ever seen. Bar none. I know that people compare it to the PS2, but the PS2's percenage of bad games isn't complete ass. Looking at Gamerankings, the PS2 has 200 titles (the max that it will show) at 82.7% or over. The Wii has FOUR. I doubt there are fifty times as many PS2 games. Meanwhile 19 of the 47 Wii tiles reviewed are 70% and under. Compare that to 360's 46/159 (a much lower percentage).

Dont' rile up the Nintendo fans with your facts and figures; it ain't worth the burn marks you'll get.

The article is sensationalist and not well written, but it does highlight the crucial point: Sony and MS do track the type of game being put on their platforms, while Nintendo just cashes the check. That is a real difference in corporate philosophies that affects the platform as a whole.

Edit: Did I miss it, or did the article not even mention the Charlie's Angels 'incident'?

 

[Joust Williams]

Games over 80% (20+ reviews)
X360 (05-06): 38/95 (40%)
PS2 (00-01): 47/175 (26.9%)
Wii (LTD): 7/47 (14.9%)

Games under 70%
X360: 23/95 (24.2%)
PS2: 60/175 (34.3%)
Wii: 19/47 (40.4%)

Ratio of 80%+ to <70%
X360: 1.65
PS2: 0.78
Wii: 0.37

What does this mean? In a nutshell, it shows the Wii to have all the negative aspects of the PS2 (high amount of shovelware,

Spoiler

about the same horsepower oh yes I went there

) without the positives (large library,

Spoiler

decent power compared to the competition oh I went there again

).

 

[capslock]

WTF.

1) The Nintendo Seal of Quality, as they're talking about, ceased to exist ages ago.
2) Fodder ALWAYS goes to the most successful systems. No exceptions. See PS2. See GBA.
3) The PS3 ain't getting so many Nickelodeon fodder games because kids can't afford $600 systems. They go to the PS2 instead.

Thread should have ended here.

 

[Jokeropia]

The Wii has a higher percentage of crap games than any full-sized console I have ever seen. Bar none. I know that people compare it to the PS2, but the PS2's percenage of bad games isn't complete ass. Looking at Gamerankings, the PS2 has 200 titles (the max that it will show) at 82.7% or over. The Wii has FOUR. I doubt there are fifty times as many PS2 games. Meanwhile 19 of the 47 Wii tiles reviewed are 70% and under. Compare that to 360's 46/159 (a much lower percentage).

PS2 also has 200 games at 62% or lower, compared to 13 on Wii. You can chalk the lower amount of top games up to much weaker third party support out of the gates.

 

[Joust Williams]

Yeah, so? If it remains weak, why should I (or anyone) care?
Just trying to shed some light on this "next PS2" deal that I keep hearing.

 

[SaggyMonkey]

I'm sure Nintendo will be happy to take all of these suggestions on how to run their business, but they're TOO BUSY RAKING IN MONEY.

 

[Captain Glanton]

I'm sure Nintendo will be happy to take all of these suggestions on how to run their business, but they're TOO BUSY RAKING IN MONEY.

And we're PLAYING THEIR GAMES, not SPENDING THEIR MONEY.

This is a distinction so many Nintendo fans struggle with. I'm not sure why.

 

[Jokeropia]

Yeah, so? If it remains weak, why should I (or anyone) care?

It doesn't. Better support are coming and Marvelous of all publishers are leading the way. DS also had to prove itself ten times over before third parties started to take it seriously.

And we're PLAYING THEIR GAMES, not SPENDING THEIR MONEY.

This is a distinction so many Nintendo fans struggle with. I'm not sure why.

Eh? There is no problem with the quality of Nintendo games. As a consumer I'm not affected at all by the presence of shovelware as I can just opt not to buy it.

 

[Quagm1r3]

WTF.

1) The Nintendo Seal of Quality, as they're talking about, ceased to exist ages ago.

They mentioned that in the article, which indicates even more than Nintendo doesn't care as much as they used to about who makes what for their systems.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

Joust, I see what you're trying to get across, but the way you're going about it is pretty worthless, statistically speaking. Granted, much of GAF is stupid enough that the point might be made anyway.

My two cents on this:
Garbage will land on any console. Sony and MS may have standards that Nintendo doesn't, but that didn't stop any of them from allowing customers to be facefucked by Enter the Matrix or Spider-Man 3. Obviously nobody is going to say "No Spider-Man 3 on my console", but if they aren't willing to shoot down shitty products regardless of attached license/ political ramifications, then it doesn't do the customer a hell of a lot of good anyway. I don't feel like any of the three does much of a good job keeping the shit away from their systems, and if MS/Sony allow thirty shit games to appear while Nintendo allows forty-five, I'm afraid I'm not seeing much of a practical distinction.

 

[SaggyMonkey]

And we're PLAYING THEIR GAMES, not SPENDING THEIR MONEY.

This is a distinction so many Nintendo fans struggle with. I'm not sure why.

If you're a consumer unsmart enough to buy Chicken Shoot or White Van Racing, you deserve that turd. And Nintendo and Sony shouldn't turn away your money.

 

[ethelred]

I think the point is that, in this day and age, SCEA and Microsoft enforce meaningful certification standards, whereas Nintendo has apparently chosen not to.

My guess is that they are not very interested in discouraging the perception that third party titles on their platforms are generally crap.

Is this really such a good thing, though? I mean, yes, while in theory it's perfectly fine to see fewer Hannah Montana games getting made, SCEA's meaningful certification standards don't exactly have a sterling reputation as being strictly beneficial for the gamer.

Those standards are pretty infamous in how they've been used to block stuff that many people might want and consider quality -- SNK Playmore has gone on record with SCEA blocking many of their games, Working Designs' localization of Goemon (or even forcing them to bundle Growlanser), games like Konami's Oz, the list goes on. Or how about various and sundry PSX ports on the PSP? "Please add additional content!" Great idea -- but I'd rather have taken the Suikoden I + II compilation as we could get 'em than not get them at all because the economics didn't support adding more content.

You've got to balance these things out. Personally, I'd rather the hardware manufacturer stand out of the way -- if a publisher wants to publish and the buyer wants to buy, let it happen.

 

[Lobster]

They mentioned that in the article, which indicates even more than Nintendo doesn't care as much as they used to about who makes what for their systems.

Well they have to not care otherwise they'll be screwed when it comes to 3rd party support.

 

[Senretsu]

The seal of quality comes from a different era of gaming, when the gaming industry was crashing, it was a necessary thing back in the day when there really was tons of crap and anyone could produce anything, it didn't even have to work.

Meijilan put it best, it's just a sticker that goes on. Tons of crap is released on every system so it doesn't matter. As long as good games do come out, I'll decide which ones to buy myself.

 

[Joust Williams]

Joust, I see what you're trying to get across, but the way you're going about it is pretty worthless, statistically speaking.

No, it isn't. Here's the point. I will paraphrase what I have seen lots of times on this board (and others):

"How come there are so many bad games for Wii?"
"It's too busy being the next PS2, you see, the PS2 was just like this"

EXCEPT IT WASN'T. Not according to the numbers. Not only did the PS2 have more games period and many, many more quality games, it had a lower ratio of crap. And I DO see a difference between the Wii's lineup and the next-gen systems' lineups. There is just a flood of garbage.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

No, it isn't. Here's the point. I will paraphrase what I have seen lots of times on this board (and others):

"How come there are so many bad games for Wii?"
"It's too busy being the next PS2, you see, the PS2 was just like this"

EXCEPT IT WASN'T. Not according to the numbers. Not only did the PS2 have more games period and many, many more quality games, it had a lower ratio of crap.

You can't possibly control for the various factors involved sufficiently to make meaningful conclusions about the results, so yes, it's statistically worthless. I'm sorry you have a poor understanding of what that means. Would you like a nice red ball to play with instead?

 

[MisterHero]

No, it isn't. Here's the point. I will paraphrase what I have seen lots of times on this board (and others):

"How come there are so many bad games for Wii?"
"It's too busy being the next PS2, you see, the PS2 was just like this"

EXCEPT IT WASN'T. Not according to the numbers. Not only did the PS2 have more games period and many, many more quality games, it had a lower ratio of crap. And I DO see a difference between the Wii's lineup and the next-gen systems' lineups. There is just a flood of garbage.

Yes, the PS2's launch had crowd-pleasing games like Fantavision and The Bouncer.

 

[Stealth]

I actually had this argument with a friend before, and we looked at all the games that have an 80% or higher score on GameRankings for PS2 and GameCube, and weighed them according to the size of each system's library. The PS2 came out ahead by a pretty decent margin. So yeah, Nintendo knows how to stock up on stinkers. But the Game Boy generations should have taught us that long ago.

 

[Joust Williams]

Huh? I am looking at the NUMBERS. I don't care WHAT the factors are. It doesn't matter.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

Huh? I am looking at the NUBMERS. I don't care WHAT the factors are. It doesn't matter.

And that is why you fail. Statistically speaking, of course.

 

[Tobor]

Articles like this just read one way to me:

"We're cranky old hardcores, we want everything to stay the same forever. Why do things have to change? We don't like change. All games should be extreme and hardcore or they or for babies. Kids games on Sony and MS consoles are fine, but on Wii they are scary and awful. Waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh. Get off my lawn, kid! Ooooh, Metamucil is on sale!"

 

[Joust Williams]

And that is why you fail. Statistically speaking, of course.

No, statistically speaking, the numbers are proof that this is not the PS2. If you can tell me why the reasons for that are relevant, then go ahead. But my point was there were more good games/less bad games for PS2 at the start then there are for Wii. And that's ALL THAT MATTERS.

 

[Jokeropia]

The difference between the PS2 and the Wii is that PS2 never had to prove itself in the market before getting strong support.

 

[Tobor]

No, statistically speaking, the numbers are proof that this is not the PS2. If you can tell me why the reasons for that are relevant, then go ahead. But my point was there were more good games/less bad games for PS2 at the start then there are for Wii. And that's ALL THAT MATTERS.

All that matters to me is that you're still getting riled up about this. When the doctor is examining you post heart attack for lifestyle changes, make sure to tell him about your Nintendo hatred.

 

[MisterHero]

Articles like this just read one way to me:

"We're cranky old hardcores, we want everything to stay the same forever. Why do things have to change? We don't like change. All games should be extreme and hardcore or they or for babies. Kids games on Sony and MS consoles are fine, but on Wii they are scary and awful. Waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh. Get off my lawn, kid! Ooooh, Metamucil is on sale!"

Wouldn't a hardcore gamer remember that Nintendo got heavilly berated for enforcing quality control on NES and SNES?

 

[Joust Williams]

Who cares? Then it isn't the PS2, is it? The 360 and PS3 are having no trouble getting the good games. Maybe THEY'RE the PS2s.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

No, statistically speaking, the numbers are proof that this is not the PS2. If you can tell me why the reasons for that are relevant, then go ahead. But my point was there were more good games/less bad games for PS2 at the start then there are for Wii. And that's ALL THAT MATTERS.

No, because proper statistical reasoning DEMANDS that you carefully examine potentially influential factors and take them into account. What you are doing is a straight up "apples-oranges" comparison which I suppose works on its face and might convince the layperson, but really holds no proper meaning or value. Of course the Wii isn't the PS2 - only the PS2 is the PS2. Only the Virtual Boy is the Virtual Boy. Only Joust Williams is Joust Williams.

That's why you have to account for various factors. If one were able to do that, the results might support you, or they might not. Who knows? I'm certainly not going to waste a Saturday trying, unless you feel like funding this research at my normal rate. What you have done is essentially a surface analysis that provides results of shallow meaning and value. If you're happy with that, carry on. Just know that it really doesn't mean fuck all of anything on its own.

 

[Joust Williams]

It means that the Wii is not in the same position as the PS2, quality games wise. That's all that matters. Here was my assessment:
"I bet Wii games are not up to the PS2 standards"
Gamerankings tells me that I am right! There is no need to know why. I KNOW WHY. It doesn't matter.

 

[Shorty]

Will Wii Fit get the

?
If yes I blame this Game

 

[Kai Dracon]

I was under the impression that the Nintendo Seal of Quality was originally a gimmick for the most part, to make consumers feel there was something "special" about 3rd party products for Nintendo systems, after the glut of cheap fodder that helped to sink videogames in the Atari Age. There's always been plenty of pure fodder on Nintendo systems, including some of the worst games ever made.

 

[Tobor]

Wouldn't a hardcore gamer remember that Nintendo got heavilly berated for enforcing quality control on NES and SNES?

Articles like this are just an excuse for Wii moaning and groaning by people who are too jaded and biased to just relax and go with the flow. The Seal is just an means to an end.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

It means that the Wii is not in the same position as the PS2, quality games wise. That's all that matters. Here was my assessment:
"I bet Wii games are not up to the PS2 standards"
Gamerankings tells me that I am right! There is no need to know why. I KNOW WHY. It doesn't matter.

I give up. This is like trying to teach a dog to play the piano.

Would it really bake your noodle to find out that I agree with your opinion on the Wii library? Because I do. I'm not exactly a cheerful Wii owner. It's your methodology that I have issues with, because you are pretending to have statistical backing for your opinion, and as far as you've bothered to study it, you don't.