Support NeoGAF

[StoopKid]

Only game console I've ever played with my grandma.

So it's a win in my book.

 

[LegendofLex]

The PS3 had Blu-ray, HDMI, and WiFi support Day 1. But...I'm not even sure what you mean by the bolded. Care to explain?

Nintendo was intentionally aiming for a very different audience than the one on PS3 and Xbox 360. There was no reason to implement hardware parity because it would have run contrary to their new audience's needs, which are cheap consoles that are easy to set up and use, worked well with their existing TVs (not HD), and can be played by the whole family.

This worked like a fucking charm. It's not their fault publishers ignored it because they weren't able to port their hardcore games from those platforms.

 

[Airola]

I had pretty much quit "modern" gaming after PS1. I couple of times I loaned the N64 and Gamecube from my cousins and neighbours and although I wholeheartedly enjoyed Mario 64, Smash Melee and Resident Evil remake, I was starting to have a huge disinterest towards new games.

Ocarina of Time was a disappointment (although I, perhaps a decade later, changed my mind) and Super Mario Sunshine was even bigger disappointment. Most of the games I saw in the game magazines looked incredibly boring. I held up hope that maybe Final Fantasy X on the PS2 would be good, but as I watched a friend playing it I was even more disappointed than what I was with Super Mario Sunshine.

To me, the absolutely most boring era of video games was the GC/PS2/DC/XBOX era.

I continued to play with my C64, NES and PS1 (wasn't interested in new PC games either although I liked Rogue Squadron a lot). I thought those machines would be my last and I would never buy a new video game console. I started buying some old consoles I never owned such as Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) and N64, and thought there would be enough good already existing games for me to play the rest of my life.

Then the Wii happened.

I tried Wii Sports somewhere and, holy shit, I needed that machine. I hadn't had that much fun playing a video game since my teen years.

It brought me back in. Not that I still was much interested in modern games, but at least my 100% total disinterest had changed.

Of modern consoles I have Wii, 3DS, Wii U and Xbox360. Still not interested in Gamecube, PS2, Xbox or Dreamcast. Not even for collection purposes. That's still the dark age of console gaming for me, although the only Smash game I've enjoyed was in the Gamecube. Melee was fantastic, but both Brawl and U have been big disappointments.

I still have an issue with modern games in general. Most of the huge franchises bore me to death. Can't enjoy Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, Uncharted, Halo, Call of Duty, Dead Space, Batman, Metal Gear Solid (although Ground Zeroes was interesting due to the small area in the style of Rambo II on C64) and don't get me started on Resident Evil... Had huge hopes for Revelations and it turned out to be a major disappointment.

Nintendo still provides good games on semi-regular basis and there are some gems in the indie companies. South Park last year was amazing and I enjoy the Fallout games a lot. I'm going with Nintendo machines and PC now. If the Wii didn't happen, I'd probably still be hoarding only retro games.

Aside from some indie titles and Fallout 3, consoles were still pretty boring when Xbox360 and PS3 came, but the Wii was new and different enough to get me interested again. Nintendo still tends to be just enough different to keep things interesting.

But let me tell you this, whatever console a Twin Peaks game would be released, I would buy that instantly and wouldn't even care if the game was bad or if that would be the only game I would ever play with it. So - other than Nintendo consoles - there's your chance

A common arguement for avoiding the Wii is it's primary feature, motion controls. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that waggling is good, but I will tell you that pointing is. Using the Wii remote as a cursor is pretty much as close to a mouse that you can get, there wern't many shooters on the Wii outside of Metroid Prime 3 and Goldeneye but those games controlled so very well. The Wii remote and nunchuk still share many of the same buttons as a traditional controller making almost any game possible and while pointing was the Wii's secret weapon a simple shake could also go a long way. I can't imagine using a button to spin in Super Mario Galaxy, it's just so natural. Same goes for New Super Mario Bros. Wii, even in NSMBU I still shake the gamepad just becuase of how good it feels.

Yeah, giving one firm shake to fly with the propeller hat felt very good. I don't think I have used the shake with the Gamepad though. I'm not sure I even knew you could still do that. But with the Wii Remote that was very enjoyable.

The Remote + Nunchuck was quite lovely as you were able to keep your hands wherever you wanted. It was pretty relaxing to sit on the sofa and letting your arms rest on your sides while still playing the game.

 

[Mael]

The PS3 had Blu-ray, HDMI, and WiFi support Day 1. But...I'm not even sure what you mean by the bolded. Care to explain?

HD twins denote 2 HD system you know.
Every single of this thing behind an afterthought for MSFT shows how much anyone actually cared about this outside of console warriors.
and the point of Wii being underpowered was to avoid the increasingly high budget costs the competitors were pushing so that not AAA games could survive.
No platform holder gives a shit about this segment of the market so they've left anyway.

Where did I say that the PS3 and 360 didn't have any bad third party games? I argued that the quality was infinitely better.

Yeah I had a ps3 last gen, let's just say this is a laughable comment as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Kawngi]

I camped out on day 1 for the Wii, but it's actually the only console I've ever owned (first being a Genesis) that I sold due to dislike :/

 

[Celine]

I didnt say its how i value games, but the wii doesnt even have a single thirdparty game with a 9, i even named the retail games that look interesting to me, and none were a 9 on metracritic, except for okami.

The kind of good third-party games the Wii excel at are the ones that are unlikely to receive an average score of 9.
They are for the most part mid budget projects, often with arcade sensibilities.
Which is in contrast with the "better" third-party games on Xbox 360/PS3.

I perfectly understand when someone, like Dakhanavar, says that Wii library didn't entice him much because he was willing for something more akin to Xbox 360/PS3 offerings because they are indeed quite different in tone and identity.

This doesn't change that using metacritic is an incredible poor tool to choose a game to buy (a game which should be worth your time based on your tastes).

I had pretty much quit "modern" gaming after PS1. I couple of times I loaned the N64 and Gamecube from my cousins and neighbours and although I wholeheartedly enjoyed Mario 64, Smash Melee and Resident Evil remake, I was starting to have a huge disinterest towards new games.

Ocarina of Time was a disappointment (although I, perhaps a decade later, changed my mind) and Super Mario Sunshine was even bigger disappointment. Most of the games I saw in the game magazines looked incredibly boring. I held up hope that maybe Final Fantasy X on the PS2 would be good, but as I watched a friend playing it I was even more disappointed than what I was with Super Mario Sunshine.

To me, the absolutely most boring era of video games was the GC/PS2/DC/XBOX era.

I continued to play with my C64, NES and PS1 (wasn't interested in new PC games either although I liked Rogue Squadron a lot). I thought those machines would be my last and I would never buy a new video game console. I started buying some old consoles I never owned such as Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) and N64, and thought there would be enough good already existing games for me to play the rest of my life.

Then the Wii happened.

I tried Wii Sports somewhere and, holy shit, I needed that machine. I hadn't had that much fun playing a video game since my teen years.

It brought me back in. Not that I still was much interested in modern games, but at least my 100% total disinterest had changed.

Of modern consoles I have Wii, 3DS, Wii U and Xbox360. Still not interested in Gamecube, PS2, Xbox or Dreamcast. Not even for collection purposes. That's still the dark age of console gaming for me, although the only Smash game I've enjoyed was in the Gamecube. Melee was fantastic, but both Brawl and U have been big disappointments.

I still have an issue with modern games in general. Most of the huge franchises bore me to death. Can't enjoy Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, Uncharted, Halo, Call of Duty, Dead Space, Batman, Metal Gear Solid (although Ground Zeroes was interesting due to the small area in the style of Rambo II on C64) and don't get me started on Resident Evil... Had huge hopes for Revelations and it turned out to be a major disappointment.

Nintendo still provides good games on semi-regular basis and there are some gems in the indie companies. South Park last year was amazing and I enjoy the Fallout games a lot. I'm going with Nintendo machines and PC now. If the Wii didn't happen, I'd probably still be hoarding only retro games.

Aside from some indie titles and Fallout 3, consoles were still pretty boring when Xbox360 and PS3 came, but the Wii was new and different enough to get me interested again. Nintendo still tends to be just enough different to keep things interesting.

But let me tell you this, whatever console a Twin Peaks game would be released, I would buy that instantly and wouldn't even care if the game was bad or if that would be the only game I would ever play with it. So - other than Nintendo consoles - there's your chance

Your story doesn't surprise me one bit, what Wii offered at the time was very different from what one would consider "modern games" (big budget affairs focused on cinematic set pieces and expansive world).
It's like it tried to unleash a new age of arcade gaming only just at home.

 

[greg400]

Where did I say that the PS3 and 360 didn't have any bad third party games? I argued that the quality was infinitely better.

You may not have caught this since I just posted it as an edit:

Basically, the PS2 had much better quality when it came to 3rd party support.

I guess I need to spoonfeed you your own quotes. Maybe read what I'm quoting?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=183308867&postcount=395

To think you're arguing others are moving goal posts. This is just too funny.

You've gone from claiming Xenoblade is a third party title.
To claiming that there's no good third party games on Wii.
To claiming that there's no good third party games on Wii that you like.
To claiming that 360 and PS3 didn't have as many bad third party games.
To claiming that there's higher quality third party on PS2

 

[LegendofLex]

I had pretty much quit "modern" gaming after PS1. I couple of times I loaned the N64 and Gamecube from my cousins and neighbours and although I wholeheartedly enjoyed Mario 64, Smash Melee and Resident Evil remake, I was starting to have a huge disinterest towards new games.

Ocarina of Time was a disappointment (although I, perhaps a decade later, changed my mind) and Super Mario Sunshine was even bigger disappointment. Most of the games I saw in the game magazines looked incredibly boring. I held up hope that maybe Final Fantasy X on the PS2 would be good, but as I watched a friend playing it I was even more disappointed than what I was with Super Mario Sunshine.

To me, the absolutely most boring era of video games was the GC/PS2/DC/XBOX era.

I continued to play with my C64, NES and PS1 (wasn't interested in new PC games either although I liked Rogue Squadron a lot). I thought those machines would be my last and I would never buy a new video game console. I started buying some old consoles I never owned such as Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) and N64, and thought there would be enough good already existing games for me to play the rest of my life.

Then the Wii happened.

I tried Wii Sports somewhere and, holy shit, I needed that machine. I hadn't had that much fun playing a video game since my teen years.

It brought me back in. Not that I still was much interested in modern games, but at least my 100% total disinterest had changed.

Since you're, like, exactly the kind of gamer Nintendo was trying to reach, I'd be curious to hear more of your thoughts on the Wii library beyond Wii Sports and Smash. What kept you interested in Nintendo even as the Wii years wound down?


On the third-party discussion, I won't dispute that the quality of third-party games as an average across all third-party games on the platform was certainly poorer than on PS2. It was missing the big hitters since they were all on PS3/Xbox 360. But I'd argue that the standout quality third-party games generally outshined GameCube, and I think that ought to count for something.

 

[redcrayon]

Basically, the PS2 had much better quality when it came to 3rd party support.

I agree with you there, but that's not what I was contesting. Your initial point that I responded to was that you didn't remember those shitty licensed games on PSOne/PS2 at all, as if it was unique to the Wii.

Personally I think the PS2 wipes the floor with modern consoles too in terms of variety of major AAA third party support rather than our open world/rpg/shooters all coallescing into one mega genre, but that's way off topic.

 

[Sir Alemeth]

Amazing console. Had so much fun with it.
The only thing missing was HD.

 

[ninjablade]

The kind of good third-party games the Wii excel at are the ones that are unlikely to receive an average score of 9.
They are for the most part mid budget projects, often with arcade sensibilities.
Which is in contrast with the "better" third-party games on Xbox 360/PS3.

I perfectly understand when someone, like Dakhanavar, says that Wii library didn't entice him much because he was willing for something more akin to Xbox 360/PS3 offerings because they are indeed quite different in tone and identity.

This doesn't change that using metacritic is an incredible poor tool to choose a game to buy (a game which should be worth your time based on your tastes).

Not really even if im not interested. In a game if it get over a 9 on metracritic i wamt to play it to see what all the hype. Is about, unless i hate the artsyle. Now anything Im interested in i can go low 7s.

 

[Mael]

As far as goal post moving,
I'm partial to this gif

Not really even if im not interested. In a game if it get over a 9 on metracritic i wamt to play it to see what all the hype. Is about, unless i hate the artsyle. Now anything Im interested in i can go low 7s.

As far as last gen goes, anything and its mother got between 8 and 9.
For Wii you quickly learned to simply shut the critics out and goes by user ratings or reviews, they were far more informative and accurate.
I mean you got a review of a Fire Emblem docking points because the game didn't use Miis and motion controls after all.
Heck you even had a review of Football Manager where the guy expect FiFA.
What I mean is that last gen reviews were shit.

 

[Nanashrew]

Only game console I've ever played with my grandma.

So it's a win in my book.

Back in the NES and SNES era, I used to play games with my mom a lot so the Wii was really great for bringing back that family bonding.

Wii was actually a really great system and very under appreciated. So many good games I got to play and still haven't. Sin and Punishment: Star Successor is the absolute best rail shooter ever made.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

Nintendo was intentionally aiming for a very different audience than the one on PS3 and Xbox 360. There was no reason to implement hardware parity because it would have run contrary to their new audience's needs, which are cheap consoles that are easy to set up and use, worked well with their existing TVs (not HD), and can be played by the whole family.

This worked like a fucking charm. It's not their fault publishers ignored it because they weren't able to port their hardcore games from those platforms.

I understand why they did it, and I agree it worked, but my contention is that you can't ignore the lack of those things when judging how good a console was - especially in the context of having competition in two consoles that did.

HD twins denote 2 HD system you know.
Every single of this thing behind an afterthought for MSFT shows how much anyone actually cared about this outside of console warriors.
and the point of Wii being underpowered was to avoid the increasingly high budget costs the competitors were pushing so that not AAA games could survive.
No platform holder gives a shit about this segment of the market so they've left anyway.

When people are discussing a console and they bring up things that it did poorly or didn't have, you can't ignore those criticisms because of design decisions. The Wii didn't need HDMI, WiFi, Blu-ray and other "amenities" because it was aiming to be an inexpensive console that sold on the hype and accessibility of motion controls. But that DOESN'T somehow make the lack of hardware and software features meaningless in the overall context.

And let's stop with this console warrior nonsense.

 

[Space Medafighter X]

Completely agree with you.

Amazing games across the board, really could be one of my favorite consoles.

 

[ninjablade]

As far as goal post moving,
I'm partial to this gif

As far as last gen goes, anything and its mother got between 8 and 9.
For Wii you quickly learned to simply shut the critics out and goes by user ratings or reviews, they were far more informative and accurate.
I mean you got a review of a Fire Emblem docking points because the game didn't use Miis and motion controls after all.
Heck you even had a review of Football Manager where the guy expect FiFA.
What I mean is that last gen reviews were shit.

Or maybe thats what people Liked? Most of those high scoring games sold great.

 

[Mael]

When people are discussing a console and they bring up things that it did poorly or didn't have, you can't ignore those criticisms because of design decisions. The Wii didn't need HDMI, WiFi, Blu-ray and other "amenities" because it was aiming to be an inexpensive console that sold on the hype and accessibility of motion controls. But that DOESN'T somehow make the lack of hardware and software features meaningless in the overall context.

And let's stop with this console warrior nonsense.

Wii had WiFi out the box so I don't know why you keep insisting on the contrary.
It was made to be as inobstructive as possible, for that it needed WiFi if was to have any online capabilities.
It didn't need bluray because most games weren't going to use that much memory anyway, it would have been a prohibitive cost that brought nothing.
360 survived without Bluray, clearly Wii didn't need it especially since it wasn't trying to be a media hub.
HD penetration was low too at the time so lack of HDMi wasn't that big of a deal too (although it makes it really rough now).

Or maybe thats what people Liked? Most of those high scoring games sold great.

Didn't you bring up Okami? Most of the high scoring games last gen were at best disappointing, I was way better served not caring about scores and get user feedback to get a satisfying experience.
That's equally true for Wii, I mean look at the scores stuffs like Other M, Zelda SS or SMG 2 got if you want overrated nonsense.

 

[LegendofLex]

I understand why they did it, and I agree it worked, but my contention is that you can't ignore the lack of those things when judging how good a console was - especially in the context of having competition in two consoles that did.

Maybe. I don't think you can possibly say "Wii was bad because it didn't do ______," while still accounting for the things it did do well in good faith, though, when doing ______ almost certainly wouldn't have allowed it to succeed at any of those things.

It requires an underlying assumption that its mission and purpose were themselves wrong or bad, which I think sort of diminishes one's ability to evaluate its performance given that the entire console was based on that mission and purpose. (In effect you'll have already decided it was a poor console simply because of its priorities and intended audience, without even accounting specifically for what you believe was missing.)

Moreover, I don't think we should be evaluating consoles on the virtue of whether they can "do all things." Wii did a job that Xbox 360 and PS3 didn't; and it did it so well that it managed to sell 100 units on top of the 170 sold between the other two. Trying to interpret that in the context of whether Wii did the Xbox 360 and PS3 job as well as those platforms seems like a red herring, TBH.

 

[squall23]

Best console Taiko game and machine now and for the forseeable future.

 

[sublimit]

I agree it's one of the most underrated systems and one with the most hidden gems.

 

[djkeem]

Personally for me the wii felt like a downgrade coming off the gamecube. If there is one thing i loved about gc games it's how responsive the games felt. The controls for their games (melee, sunshine, even double dash) felt so good.
Plus the improved physics compared to their n64 counterparts. The gamecube just felt like a worthy upgrade.
I just didn't feel the physics improvement on the wii and the controls in many cases were laggy for obvious reasons (motion).

 

[Gucci Messiah]

I guess I need to spoonfeed you your own quotes. Maybe read what I'm quoting?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=183308867&postcount=395

To think you're arguing others are moving goal posts. This is just too funny.

You've gone from claiming Xenoblade is a third party title.
To claiming that there's no good third party games on Wii.
To claiming that there's no good third party games on Wii that you like.
To claiming that 360 and PS3 didn't have as many bad third party games.
To claiming that there's higher quality third party on PS2

I can't tell if you are trolling or have really bad reading comprehension skills. My position has been consistent and nothing in the quote you pulled says otherwise. Your condescending tone and gif theatrics aren't helping your argument.

I said I thought Xenoblade was a 3rd party title but in the next sentence mentioned that even if I was wrong (because I wasn't 100% and didn't claim it as fact) that just strengthened my position because it would be yet another example of a solid 1st party title.

And as far as I know, Xenoblade wasn't a first party game when it came out, I think Nintendo just helped them publish it. Even if I'm wrong, it just strengthens my argument that the Wii had awful 3rd party support considering that's one of the top games on the console.

I never said that there are no good third party games on the Wii, just that most of them don't appeal to me which has been my position all along.

You think the Wii had good third party support and I don't. You know what the differences between us is though? I'm willing to accept your opinion while you seem to think believing anything otherwise is factually incorrect.

I've been saying that the PS2 had higher quality 3rd party titles because you people brought up the fact that every market leader gets shovelware. That's not moving goalposts, it's supporting a claim.

Yes, I was. Of course successful systems get a flood of crappy games but do you know what the differences between Wii and PS2 is? The PS2 had a consistent flow of excellent third party games that the Wii can't even touch. Grand Theft Auto series, Resident Evil 4, Metal Gear Solid 3, Timesplitters, Viewtiful Joe, Guitar Hero, Virtua Fighter, Tekken, Katamari Damacy, Beyond Good and Evil, Final Fantasy series, Persona series, Shin Megami Tensei series, Devil May Cry...I could go on. Can the Wii touch this? Absolutely not, the quality on average was way worse.

You're just making stuff up at this point.

 

[I Wanna Be The Guy]

The worst home console of its generation by a distance, but it had a bunch of great games and made a fantastic secondary console. It's also my favourite Nintendo console.

 

[Mael]

I've been saying that the PS2 had higher quality 3rd party titles because you people brought up the fact that every market leader gets shovelware. That's not moving goalposts, it's supporting a claim.

You're just making stuff up at this point and acting like a kid.

PS2 have a better 3rd party catalog than the ps4 or ps1.
Your opinion on that matter doesn't mean much.
No one is saying that the Wii had the best 3rd party library ever.

 

[Spieler Eins]

Lots of games (and gaming interests) from my collection are still from Japan and I consider many AAA tropes from last gen's western mainstream awful (and even before that), even if they were getting 101% average reviews.
When I only take Japanese games from these metacritic wars, Wii doesn't only look comparable, but superior. Unless you count that several upcoming PS4 games will still be getting PS3 versions (at least in their original region).
Although the best support in that area obviously went to handheld in that gen.

 

[greg400]

I can't tell if you are trolling or have really bad reading comprehension skills. My position has been consistent and nothing in the quote you pulled says otherwise. Your condescending tone and gif theatrics aren't helping your argument.

I said I thought Xenoblade was a 3rd party title but in the next sentence mentioned that even if I was wrong (because I wasn't 100% and didn't claim it as fact) that just strengthened my position because it would be yet another example of a solid 1st party title.

I never said that there are no good third party games on the Wii, just that most of them don't appeal to me which has been my position all along.

I've been saying that the PS2 had higher quality 3rd party titles because you people brought up the fact that every market leader gets shovelware. That's not moving goalposts, it's supporting a claim.

You're just making stuff up at this point and acting like a kid.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

If you aren't going to use your words to debate in a civil fashion you might as well quit posting. All you're doing is posting gif responses and deflecting which isn't doing anything except ruining the thread.

 

[friskykillface]

I loved it

Was hyped for virtual console and while I got some games I sold/never played before they missed a lot of games

Mario kart wii was pretty good , smash brawl with its struggling online was still fun , Mario Galaxy 1+2 blew our minds

No more heroes was awesome , umbrella chronicles brought back light gun games to me

But wii u is leagues ahead of it to me

 

[GulAtiCa]

One of my favorite consoles for sure. Lot of great games and fun to it.

 

[ninjablade]

Originally Posted by Mael
The point of Wii was to AVOID making ports of shitty 3rd party games.
That's a feature not a bug.

Lol like nintendo knew the wii was gonna blow up, and even when the wii blew up, you think developers were gonna drop 360/ps3 much better hardware to accomplish there vision for the wii, this is the funniest thing i ever read. Developers like better hardware it makes them make better games.

 

[greg400]

If you aren't going to use your words to debate in a civil fashion you might as well quit posting. All you're doing is posting gif responses and deflecting which isn't doing anything except ruining the thread.

Thread topic: The Wii was such a good console
Gucci Messiah: The Wii's third party was nothing but shovelware and shit, let me move goal posts 10 times
Gucci Messiah: Stop ruining this thread

 

[redcrayon]

I've been saying that the PS2 had higher quality 3rd party titles because you people brought up the fact that every market leader gets shovelware. That's not moving goalposts, it's supporting a claim.
.

It kind of is moving goalposts as it isn't supporting the claim people are contesting. This is why people brought up that every market leader gets shovelware, it's a different point to the comparative quality of the PS2 library:

Originally Posted by Gucci Messiah
. I don't recall stuff like Arcade Zone, Calvin Tucker's Redneck Jamboree, Chuck E Cheese Party Games, Family Party, etc showing up on Sony and Microsoft's systems. .

If your argument is 'PS2 third party library better', then fair enough.
Your argument of 'only the Wii has shovelware this bad', however, was blatantly untrue due to the wealth of stinkers on other popular consoles, the former line doesn't support it due to the hundreds of shitty tie-ins on PS2 and the responses are valid.

Comparing the worst games across popular consoles doesn't do any of them any favours by definition.

 

[Castef]

Quite possibly Nintendo's second best home console right after the Super NES.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

Wii had WiFi out the box so I don't know why you keep insisting on the contrary.
It was made to be as inobstructive as possible, for that it needed WiFi if was to have any online capabilities.
It didn't need bluray because most games weren't going to use that much memory anyway, it would have been a prohibitive cost that brought nothing.
360 survived without Bluray, clearly Wii didn't need it especially since it wasn't trying to be a media hub.
HD penetration was low too at the time so lack of HDMi wasn't that big of a deal too (although it makes it really rough now).

My bad, I thought the original Wii needed an adapter like the original Xbox 360. However...

You didn't address my point, you just explained why they made the decision. You can explain why a budget phone doesn't have the same specs and the same features as a cutting edge phone, but if we are comparing them the lack of power and the lack of features is a negative in the discussion. I know why the Wii was a weak console, and it worked for Nintendo, but when comparing games on the Wii to PS3 and Xbox 360 that is still a criticism of the console.

Maybe. I don't think you can possibly say "Wii was bad because it didn't do ______," while still accounting for the things it did do well in good faith, though, when doing ______ almost certainly wouldn't have allowed it to succeed at any of those things.

It requires an underlying assumption that its mission and purpose were themselves wrong or bad, which I think sort of diminishes one's ability to evaluate its performance given that the entire console was based on that mission and purpose. (In effect you'll have already decided it was a poor console simply because of its priorities and intended audience, without even accounting specifically for what you believe was missing.)

Moreover, I don't think we should be evaluating consoles on the virtue of whether they can "do all things." Wii did a job that Xbox 360 and PS3 didn't; and it did it so well that it managed to sell 100 units on top of the 170 sold between the other two. Trying to interpret that in the context of whether Wii did the Xbox 360 and PS3 job as well as those platforms seems like a red herring, TBH.

Wii did things well, specifically it had a lot of good games and some excellent games - and games are absolutely the biggest part of a console. But starting with last generation, consoles became more than just a box for playing games. They started having robust online communities and ways to interact with them (messaging, party chat, etc.). They started offering software applications like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, etc. There were many ancillary things that lead a lot of people to be unsatisfied with the Wii. All I'm saying is that while games are the most important element for a console, I don't think we should ignore the things the Wii didn't do well or didn't have. Of course it did do things and did have things, but what it lacked generally overshadows what it did.

So we are clear, I'm not saying that the Wii was a bad console - I think it was a good one - I just think that we have to take everything into consideration.

 

[Nanashrew]

PS2 had plenty of crappy licensed games and terrible copycat games just as any other leading system.

Hell, some shovelware started on the PS2 like Action Girlz Racing.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

The Wii made me take great distance with... online gaming communities. So much rabid hate and misinformation about this console, it was sickening. My gaming has been much happier since.

Such a great, wonderful system, with a killer library.

Going by this thread, things haven't really changed. The Wii literally offends a pretty substantial part of the core gaming community.

I'm just glad to be one of those who was able to find great joy in the platform. I have so many awesome games in my Wii collection.

 

[ninjablade]

Thread topic: The Wii was such a good console
Gucci Messiah: The Wii's third party was nothing but shovelware and shit, let me move goal posts 10 times
Gucci Messiah: Stop ruining this thread

I see his point, he's explaining why he thought the wii wasnt a good console to him, if you compare third party games on wii to 360/ps3 third party games, then yes, its mostly shovelware and shit.

 

[ninjablade]

PS2 had plenty of crappy licensed games and terrible copycat games just as any other leading system.

Hell, some shovelware started on the PS2 like Action Girlz Racing.

Please stop comparing wii to ps2, it never got support like a leading system should. I suspect the main reason was developers just didnt wanna make games for lastgen hardware anymore.

 

[rjinaz]

Honestly I enjoyed a few games like Radiant Dawn, Galaxy 1 and 2. But the only must play game for me was Xenoblade. As such I only owned a Wii for a few months.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Thread topic: The Wii was such a good console
Gucci Messiah: The Wii's third party was nothing but shovelware and shit, let me move goal posts 10 times
Gucci Messiah: Stop ruining this thread

The conversation of the thread shifted organically to discussing the quality on the Wii library considering that's what many people use to determine if a system was good or not. I said the first party content was lacking compared to the GCN/Wii U and that the third party support was terrible. You took this in a literally sense, like I was saying the Wii didn't get any games published for it by anyone outside of Nintendo, so I had to correct you and let it be explicitly known that I thought the support was barebones. You brought up a list of games that you like claiming that I was 'factually wrong' and I replied back that most of the 3rd party stuff doesn't appeal to me personally and that we just have a difference of opinion. You then threw a fit and claimed that I had an agenda and now we're here.

It kind of is moving goalposts as it isn't supporting the claim people are contesting. This is why people brought up that every market leader gets shovelware, it's a different point to the comparative quality of the PS2 library:



If your argument is 'PS2 library better', then fair enough.
Your argument of 'only the Wii has shovelware this bad', then that's blatantly untrue, the former line doesn't support it and the responses are valid.

It's not moving goalposts at all. I said the Wii 3rd party support mostly consisted of shovelware, casual games, and bad spin-off titles. Then somebody countered that this happens with the market leader most of the time. I agreed and then pointed out that the difference is that the PS2 had a more consistent output of quality games which is the truth. The Wii was flooded with mini game collections and fitness games but every once in a while you'd get a gem like Monster Hunter or Lost Story. PS2 was flooded with licensed crap but we were consistently getting stuff like Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear, Devil May Cry, Shin Megami Tensei, Final Fantasy, etc.

 

[redcrayon]

The conversation of the thread shifted organically to discussing the quality on the Wii library considering that's what many people use to determine if a system was good or not. I said the first party content was lacking compared to the GCN/Wii U and that the third party support was terrible. You took this in a literally sense, like I was saying the Wii didn't get any games published for it by anyone outside of Nintendo, so I had to correct you and let it be explicitly known that I thought the support was barebones. You brought up a list of games that you like claiming that I was 'factually wrong' and I replied back that most of the 3rd party stuff doesn't appeal to me personally and that we just have a difference of opinion. You then threw a fit and claimed that I had an agenda and now we're here.



It's not moving goalposts at all. I said the Wii 3rd party support mostly consisted of shovelware, casual games, and bad spin-off titles. Then somebody countered that this happens with the market leader most of the time. I agreed and then pointed out that the difference is that the PS2 had a more consistent output of quality games which is the truth. The Wii was flooded with mini game collections and fitness games but every once in a while you'd get a gem like Monster Hunter or Lost Story. PS2 was flooded with licensed crap but we were consistently getting stuff like Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear, Devil May Cry, Shin Megami Tensei, Final Fantasy, etc.

So you were mistaken when you said that you couldn't recall shovelware appearing on PS2, as you seem to remember it now?

It's moving goalposts as your much-more-reasonable take on it above is at odds with your initial lack of being able to remember any shitty shovelware appearing on any PS/MS system.

 

[greg400]

The conversation of the thread shifted organically to discussing the quality on the Wii library considering that's what many people use to determine if a system was good or not. I said the first party content was lacking compared to the GCN/Wii U and that the third party support was terrible. You took this in a literally sense, like I was saying the Wii didn't get any games published for it by anyone outside of Nintendo, so I had to correct you and let it be explicitly known that I thought the support was barebones. You brought up a list of games that you like claiming that I was 'factually wrong' and I replied back that most of the 3rd party stuff doesn't appeal to me personally and that we just have a difference of opinion. You then threw a fit and claimed that I had an agenda and now we're here.

It's not moving goalposts at all. I said the Wii 3rd party support mostly consisted of shovelware, casual games, and bad spin-off titles. Then somebody countered that this happens with the market leader most of the time. I agreed and then pointed out that the difference is that the PS2 had a more consistent output of quality games which is the truth. The Wii was flooded with mini game collections and fitness games but every once in a while you'd get a gem like Monster Hunter or Lost Story. PS2 was flooded with licensed crap but we were consistently getting stuff like Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear, Devil May Cry, Shin Megami Tensei, Final Fantasy, etc.

First you re-write gaming history then you re-write thread history. I'm impressed, really bravo.

 

[brinstar]

Yeah, but you're better off playing Phantom Brave on PS2. They fucked up a few things in the Wii version. Also the PS2 version came with a soundtrack on first print in the case.

Also, why the hell would you play GG on Wii when the PS2 version exists and AC+R edition exists on PC.

Because I didn't have a PS2 at the time of their release? That doesn't invalidate those titles' existence.

 

[Porcile]

*CTRL + F Opoona*


C'mon GAF. You slackin'.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

So you were mistaken when you said that you couldn't recall shovelware appearing on PS2, as you seem to remember it now?

I never said I couldn't recall any shovelware. I said I couldn't recall such trashy games on the system that the Wii regularly got. I was 10 when the PS2 came out. And it's not moving goalposts but ok.

First you re-write gaming history then you re-write thread history. I'm impressed, really bravo.

There was no revisionist history. You got unreasonably upset that I think the Wii had lackluster 3rd party support and that's about it. I'm not going to engage in personal attacks or condescending posting so unless you have something interesting to say I'm just going to ignore you to avoid turning this into a multi-page slap fight.

 

[Nanashrew]

*CTRL + F Opoona*


C'mon GAF. You slackin'.

What's Opoona? I've actually never heard of it before.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Excite Truck is the game I remember the most and wish Nintendo would have Monster Games make a true sequel with online multiplayer, Wiimote controls and all modes.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I never said I couldn't recall any shovelware. I said I couldn't recall such trashy games on the system that the Wii regularly got. I was 10 when the PS2 came out. And it's not moving goalposts but ok.

There was sooooo much shovelware on PS2. I remember seeing a bunch of it at really random places like clothing and drug stores. PS2 definitely had as much shovelware as Wii did. In fact, a bunch of Wii shovelware also came to PS2.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

*CTRL + F Opoona*


C'mon GAF. You slackin'.

Never actually played this, but I was intrigued when I saw screens of it. Maybe I'll hunt it down, I'm sure it's super cheap nowadays. I've listened to some of the soundtrack and I love it.

Excite Truck is the game I remember the most and wish Nintendo would have Monster Games make a true sequel with online multiplayer, Wiimote controls and all modes.

I enjoyed Excite Truck as well. The changing landscape was so cool back then.

 

[greg400]

I never said I couldn't recall any shovelware. I said I couldn't recall such trashy games on the system that the Wii regularly got. I was 10 when the PS2 came out. And it's not moving goalposts but ok.



There was no revisionist history. You got unreasonably upset that I think the Wii had lackluster 3rd party support and that's about it. I'm not going to engage in personal attacks or condescending posting so unless you have something interesting to say I'm just going to ignore you to avoid turning this into a multi-page slap fight.

You've already turned this into a shitfest with your goal posts moving, consistent denial despite multiple people calling you out and destroying a thread that was supposed to be positive.