-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
EA - We should have bet on Wii
- Thread starter future_pinoy
- Start date
- Status
halo 2.So because you dont like certain genres and you like others, the ones that you like shouldnt appear on the Wii.KTallguy said:
I have quoted those comments because you make it seem the world revolves around just you. Have you ever thought that the games you like didnt apply to the person you replied to.
EDIT:This response also goes out to Guled who seems to have the same selfishness.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I find it interesting that you would have bought a Wii period if that's what matters most to you.Guled said:
I'm not one to argue what other people want in a game, I just think it's ridiculous that how a game looks takes precedence over how a game controls, the latter being more core to the game experience.
SuperSonic1305
Member
So he mentions how PS3/360 software sales are better than DS/Wii software sales and then says they made the wrong bet? You would think selling the most software on the consoles with the lower install base means there is something wrong with the Wii.
Jokeropia said:
60K in the first month? I'm sure they're ecstatic.
http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/06/17/ea-on-boom-blox-sales/
Aaron Strife
Banned
I think he's more referring to the large userbase that no third party dev really wants to take advantage of. There's nothing "wrong" with the Wii, because software does sell, it's just mostly first-party because first-party games happen to be the only really notable titles available. No one wants to buy "Piece of shit targeted towards the old folk who have never played a video game in their life before 2"SuperSonic1305 said:
Oh did you miss this partsoldat7 said:
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
I like how people keep on repeating physics and AI mantra as though they actually cared about either of these things prior to this generation.
I never quite got how accurate physics automatically makes things better. Unless you're talking about stuff like the gravity gun or puzzles, I honestly think that most games can get by with the physics of last generation. Most simply aren't designed to take advantage of it. From what I've seen, what better physics add are those tiny little touches that you often notice once, then forget about for the rest of the game. They're nice to have, but usually won't elevate a good game from a great one.
While I find the physics thing perplexing, I find the AI thing amusing. Most of the methods used for getting good AI don't actually require all that much power. They really don't. Some of the more complex methods even yield quite bad results if implemented incorrectly. "The power of next-gen" is far from a requirement as far as AI is concerned.
If you're going to argue for power, argue for better visuals, better framerate, more objects on the screen or more complicated animations. Don't argue for stuff like physics or AI.
I never quite got how accurate physics automatically makes things better. Unless you're talking about stuff like the gravity gun or puzzles, I honestly think that most games can get by with the physics of last generation. Most simply aren't designed to take advantage of it. From what I've seen, what better physics add are those tiny little touches that you often notice once, then forget about for the rest of the game. They're nice to have, but usually won't elevate a good game from a great one.
While I find the physics thing perplexing, I find the AI thing amusing. Most of the methods used for getting good AI don't actually require all that much power. They really don't. Some of the more complex methods even yield quite bad results if implemented incorrectly. "The power of next-gen" is far from a requirement as far as AI is concerned.
If you're going to argue for power, argue for better visuals, better framerate, more objects on the screen or more complicated animations. Don't argue for stuff like physics or AI.
its not only the looks, but the scope, physics, ai and how that can be on the screen at once and that matters to me way more then how a game controls. Look at the mgs games, they control like shit but are still one of the best video game series.Aaron Strife said:
as video games evolve, so dose the standard of quailty. Now we have the hardware to do it, the bar has been raised. I'm sure that 3d or online would have not matter in older generations, but now that we could do it, its hard to go back. Also, having a lot of enemies on the screen each running their own ai patterns dose take up a lot of power.viciouskillersquirrel said:
WickedLaharl
Member
Grecco said:
BS. zombie count was the reason most said DR wouldn't be possible on wii. and after the games reveal it seems the sane were right.
jrricky said:
When did I ever say this?
Don't put words in my mouth!
I said that all three consoles offer unique experiences that the others don't!
Again, nothing wrong with the Wii games that I posted existing. People get enjoyment out of them! But they're not for me!
I'm happy that I have choices in the market.
If you want to play Wii games only, that's totally fine!
viciouskillersquirrel said:
You're right that physics don't make games better necessarily.
But at a certain point, it's those little touches can improve the overall experience of the user.
Even if you don't notice them in the first place!
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Grecco said:
It can't be done on Wii. That's why Capcom are changing it so much. (switching to over the shoulder view to partially hide the lack of zombies... changing the focus from melee to gunplay to slow down your kill rate...)
AndoCalrissian
Member
The physics and AI probably have far less bearing on the actual gameplay than you think.Ariexv said:
Regardless, I'm tired of the "these games couldn't be done on Wii" argument. No one knows how any of those games would have ended up if they had been developed with the Wii in mind at the beginning. Could be better, could be worse, but we just don't know.
This is why I have learned to just sit back and watch the trainwrecks that are nintendo wii sales-age threads. The arbritrary rules and regulations that start popping up. And how quickly opinions become either facts or trolling depending solely on which side you are taking.viciouskillersquirrel said:
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
You'd be surprised at how much fun you could have with older games if you let go of your pre-conceived notions and ignored your peer group's opinions and simply played them for the sake of playing them, regardless of production values.Guled said:
You'd also be surprised about the AI's use of resources, even for a lot of enemies, you really would. The big drain on power is drawing these enemies on the screen and calculating the geometry for each - always has been. Sadly, there aren't a lot of ways to make that process more efficient than it is now.
Aaron Strife
Banned
That's not at all what I said, rather it was in reference to a comment made by that poster about placing AI/graphics/etc. on a higher pedestal than controls in general.Kapsama said:
Obviously tacking waggle onto a game doesn't improve its controls on its own - though, if a game is built around the motion sensing then it has a better chance to succeed.
AndoCalrissian
Member
I'm not sure that's what he's saying. I think he's trying to say that perhaps we should put more emphasis on how a game plays than how it looks. In the case of Wii, this is pretty paramount as it doesn't support the graphical abilities of the other consoles, and instead relies on a different method of control which firmly places the focus there.Kapsama said:
Aaron Strife
Banned
Have you even seen or played the game? It probably cost more to tack his name on the box than actually developing it. It's not a high budget game.Kapsama said:
I never said it would not be fun, I still play a lot of pre-ps2 games from time to time and have a blast. Is just today, before I spend 60$ on a game, I want to get the best possible experience out of it. If there was a game for both HD console and wii, I would most likely pick up the HD version since I will most likely get more out of that, is that wrong? If the gameplay is good, it will stay good no matter what system it is, but the production value can make a game a lot betterviciouskillersquirrel said:
Aaron Strife
Banned
Perhaps, but you mentioned marketing, which I find odd considering there's hardly any for the game to begin with.KTallguy said:
Aaron Strife said:
My fault for skimming then.
AndoCalrissian said:
Yes generally you're right, the emphasis should be on game play more so than graphics.
But whew it's been almost a decade since the first console of the last generation debuted and with the Wii being closer to them than the PS3 and 360 we have had the same graphics more or less for 10 years now. There comes a point where the graphics whore in me just doesn't want to put up with it anymore and longs for change.
Wii games tend to have legs to them, didn't My Sims really never track but ended up doing more than a million?
The problem with GAF analysis is that we don't really get enough data for software analysis. We need to see the top 50 every month and to be able to track titles sales over the lifetime of the platform.
The problem with GAF analysis is that we don't really get enough data for software analysis. We need to see the top 50 every month and to be able to track titles sales over the lifetime of the platform.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Do we even know what the requirements are for a PS3 Greatest Hit? I assume it's 250k like the PSP.Jammy said:
In any case, using Greatest Hits to gauge a game's success isn't really efficient, since Ninja Gaiden selling 250k and like Hot Shots Golf selling 250k are two totally different 250ks.
If it makes you feel any better I have a 360 tookpop said:
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
Aaron Strife said:
As a former Wii owner who sold his Wii because the controls did not deliver, I can tell you that the whole control thing is in the eye of the beholder. I for one think it's criminal that Nintendo didn't put a second analog stick on the controller. To me that's like Oxygen, it's hard to breath without it. Secondly, the fact that they had to release the motion plus is proof enough to me that I was right when I came to the conclusion that the controls were not all that accurate. Further, nothing frustrated me more than a sunny day and trying to use the flaky pointer controls. Everything about the WiiMote was not as accurate as they originally billed it, so it was a huge let down to me. Then the lack of HD graphics ensured that most games looked bad on my HDTV (and don't say it's my TV I have a Bravia XBR2 and Pioneer Kuro). Last gen with PS2 the graphics were fine, I had an SDTV, and the graphics looked good on it. Now have retired all of my SDTV's and for new games going forward, I want 720p minimum.
Also I absolutely abhorred having to shake the wiimote to attack in Zelda and to spin in Galaxy. It ruined those games for me. I just wanted a damn button to do those things because shaking a controller to achieve the same task did not add immersion, the opposite was true for me, it only added annoyance for me. Couple that with a sunny day and trying to collect stars with the pointer was a bear. It pains me to say that. I've owned every Nintendo console since the SNES, and the SNES is one of my favorite consoles of all time, and houses what may be the greatest game ever made, Super Metriod. I have loved every proper mario game made since Super Mario Bros. I would have loved Galaxy were it not for the controls just simply not working for me. I just think Nintendo went for the casual market this time, and that's not where I'm at. I want them to cater to me, and they chose to cater to their wallet this time around, and so I'm gonna take a pass while they make all their money.
So don't tell me the controls are better, that's an individual preference, and it's debatable. I think a big majority of gamers would prefer a second analog stick to motion controls if they had to make a choice.
AndoCalrissian
Member
I get that, but that doesn't necessarily make the PS3 and 360 worth better games than the Wii as much of this thread, though not necessarily you, alleges. As much as you may have been sick of graphical limitations, others who had been using primarily analog sticks for nearly 10 years prior to this generation were tired of them and too wanted something improved or at least different.Kapsama said:
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
kpop100 said:
Sorry to poke fun since for all I know, you own and play all three consoles, but topics such as this one tend to draw out the trolls which in turn draws out the defense forces. The sales agers look on in disgust.
drakesfortune said:
......
.......
........
.........
Seriously? The Wii has the largest marketshare so you are wrong. It's not that you're opinion is wrong but you are factually wrong. Wii gamers are gamers. If you play Wii Sports, you're a gamer and the majority of gamers do want motion/ir control over the second analog stick.
Aaron Strife
Banned
To be honest it should have been 20-30 dollars from the very beginning, but then EA wouldn't make as much money.KTallguy said:
When it hits 30, I'll bite.
Again, you misread what I said. Controls, on the whole, play a larger part to me than the visual upgrades. Whether that means I'm playing with a Wii remote or a Dual Shock.drakesfortune said:
Kapsama said:
Hmm. It could also be ridiculous to assume that the standard controller wasn't going to change either.
A look at other electronics markets - cellphones, portables, PDAs, etc. - point toward a progression in input/interaction methods. It's only logical that this would pertain to game systems as well.
That's not to say that everyone 'must enjoy it'. But if you are going to use the analogy of the analog stick - something that was a change that became a standard, common sense dictates that it is going to change. And things like motion sensing and other similar techs seem to be a big consideration for the industry.
AndoCalrissian
Member
Graphics too are in the eye of the beholder as some prefer retro styles to the more advanced graphics available now. In that same vein you can't tell me that the graphics in Fable 2 are better than those in Link to the Past.drakesfortune said:
As to your point about gamer's preferences. Unfortunately, we can't really test that hypothesis due to the imbalance of power in the systems as well as the dearth of comparable high profile titles or even the same titles.
- Status