'Me Too' Versions of Games? No Thanks, You've Got The Wrong Console.

To say that a port of a current-gen game to Wii will necessarily and always be the inferior version is to accept the notion that graphics are the ultimate standard by which quality is judged. So I say to the anti-'me too' camp, if that's truly how you feel, then perhaps it's actually YOU who bought the wrong console. ;)clicketyclick

The main point I'm trying to make is that whatever game people want from the other two consoles -- would lose many things when they are brought to the Wii -- it just wouldn't be the same experience.

I think what Gabu has said explains it best.

I have no money for a PS3 and 360 at the moment so when a game that is multiplat is going to be on the Wii, all I ask is that it's a good game and hopefully will have all or most of the features of the PS3 and 360 counterparts. When a dev decides to port a PS3/360 game to the Wii (Dead Rising for example), I'll buy their games as long as they port it right. Admittedly, Dead Rising isn't as good as what it could've been on the Wii but I like DR and I like the control scheme so I'll probably end up buying it sometime down the road. I'm not asking for all PS3/360 games to be ported to the Wii, no no no but if they do decide to port or make a spin-off of these games, I will be keeping a very close eye on them ;) (except rail shooters, only rail shooter I care for is HoD)

COD World at War Wii worked pretty good.

So why not bring Bioshock to Wii.

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"] To say that a port of a current-gen game to Wii will necessarily and always be the inferior version is to accept the notion that graphics are the ultimate standard by which quality is judged. So I say to the anti-'me too' camp, if that's truly how you feel, then perhaps it's actually YOU who bought the wrong console. ;)Haziqonfire

The main point I'm trying to make is that whatever game people want from the other two consoles -- would lose many things when they are brought to the Wii -- it just wouldn't be the same experience.

I think what Gabu has said explains it best.

I'm one who would like to see some of these games brought to the Wii, and I can honestly say that I don't expect it to be the same experience as the other consoles. In fact, I don't want it to be, that's why I got a Wii. But because I like the motion and IR controls of the Wii, doesn't mean that I don't want the next chapter in the RE storyline. What's wrong with RE5 with a Wii twist? So what if the graphics aren't as good, or we have to make some AI sacrifices? We make gains in the controls scheme (hopefully). It's a trade, one that I'm personally more than willing to make.

Like I said earlier, I realize the extra cost of developing a special Wii version along side the 360 and PS3 versions makes this too expensive in many cases. But I don't see anything wrong with the desire to have Wii versions of these games.

And imo, the argument that some of us simply have the wrong console or need to buy a 360 only demonstrates the limitations of the Wii, not some inherent creative or unique quality of the hardware.

GabuEx: "a port of a game will almost assuredly not be what it could have been had it been built ground-up for the console."

All Wii ports are built ground-up for the console because they can't be ported directly, as you would port between PS3/360/PC. It's a tad misleading to call them ports, I guess.

It's the exact same problem movies based on books haveGabuEx

The problem at the heart of transition from book to movie is one of description. You lose the descriptive writing style (turn of phrase, metaphor, simile, reference), attention to certain aspects of the setting, opinion, and shaping when you translate text to an image - written media to visual media.

That's not at all the problem with the transition from PS3/360 to Wii, or even PC to console, where you're just working with transitions between different ways of rendering visual media, and which is a technical issue over how those images are made, how much detail they show, and how many can be fitted on a disc.

Apples and oranges may both be fruit, but your comparison is stretched, and your assertion that it's the exact same problem is perplexing.

the fact remains that it was made for its original format and the original format is, as a result, almost always the best way to experience whatever it is as it was meant to be experienced ... no matter what, something's going to be lost in a port of that sort, and chances are it's going to be something that was supposed to be part of the game.GabuEx

whatever game people want from the other two consoles -- would lose many things when they are brought to the Wii -- it just wouldn't be the same experience.Haziqonfire

Gabu, you say the "original" format IS usually the best experience. First of all, you're again speaking in realities. Just because that's how it IS doesn't mean that's how it HAS to be. But since you admit that there are times when it isn't ("almost always" = not always), you already accept that, and know that the port can be just as good as or better than the original, or at least just down to a matter of preference.

Gabu and Haziq, that something that's going to be lost is visual fidelity. The game won't look nearly as good. That's a clear demerit, but not one that is so overwhelmingly negative that nothing can make up for it.

The Wii's IR pointer is such an incredible improvement in console shooters. Not only does it control more like a mouse, allowing you to adjust the reticle position with greater sensitivity and accuracy, but it also means you can take on enemies coming at you from all directions with greater ease, like on PC, which allows devs to be more creative with their enemy attacks than they currently are on console (what makes this very clear is that, in ports from PC to console, devs alter the frequency and direction from which enemies come at you to be more in front of you because console controls are inferior and the game would otherwise be harder for console gamers than PC gamers.)

Sure it won't be the same experience, not necessarily a worse one. And what's wrong with a difference? I thought that's what you were saying you wanted when you were objecting to ports?

If right now you're objecting that graphical quality isn't the major thing to be lost in a port to Wii, then see my answer to Wintry. If right now you're thinking that losing out on graphical quality is such a serious issue that all Wii ports are doomed to be inferior, reread my answer that you were both responding to.

i want a port of street fighter 5 because i'm not buying a new console so i can play more games.

[QUOTE="maxgil2"]

Erm no wanting a good game doesn't mean, I've got the wrong console. RE5 even if watered down graphics would still be a good game. Alot of the threads you see popping up is because Capcom lied abt RE5 said as being impossible on Wii - I've played the game o PS3 ITS NOT IMPOSSIBLE, they just don't want to release it for the Wii.

If RE5 had so complicated graphics power that I don't notice?..then whats the point?...

Im fine with rail shooters ...you can't just look in your mindset & say oh yea they've got the wrong console just because ppl want game from other console too. Its all abt the effort being put into a Wii game really, a port doesn't neccessarily means it has to be bad..

This is becoming like a Lisa Simpson syndrome...always wanting to be different.

GabuEx

But here's the thing: I own a 360. If Capcom ported RE5 over to the Wii, that would take up development resources to produce an inferiorport which, if I were interested in, I would already own on another system. Why would I want them to do that?

If people want all the games that the other consoles were getting, why do they not buy those consoles? I own a Wii because I want the games that the Wii is getting.

[QUOTE="santiagochile"]

Rail shooters suck! You forget about COD World at War, and games like Guitar Hero. I think you are missing the point. People want great games with Wii controls, not great games with crappy controls (other consoles). Now what is wrong with that? I played COD 4 on 360 after playing WAW on the Wii, and it sucked! The controls were a joke. Please, I want these games on the Wii. As for the on rails garbage, please, keep that off my Wii!

Arc2012

Sure, everyone wants a great game with great controls, and if you own a Wii, that most likely means you think the Wii controls well (possibly greatly, as I do). But why are you demanding that you get the same exact game as the other systems, even if you know that it simply cannot be done, because it will always be inferior to the version on the system it was built for? What you're asking for are crappy games with great controls.

Great point.

Last I checked having games that I didn't particularly like on the Wii was really effecting my life, too. For every game that comes out for the Wii that I am not too fond of, I just stare at my wii, furiously, for the standard play time of said game.

You know what I just realized? Ghostbusters. Case. In. Point. PS3/360 get their version, and Wii get ours. And ours looks pretty damn good! You can't claim one version is better or worse than the other, because each version brings it's own stuff to the table. If you go to the Ghostbusters Wii forum, there's even a guy who posted that he will be purchasing both the PS3 versions and the Wii version. So why is it Atari can make multiple versions of a game, yet Capcom can not? And why is it so many people on this forum can't see how Wii can have our own versions that are NOT just chopped down ports. Saying no to "me-too" games means saying no to games like Ghostbusters. Are you sure you want to say that?Mike1978Smith

Great point! Shaun White would be another good example of a quality Wii game that is also multi-platform. It can be done as long as the developers just try and not use "Oh, the Wii is too weak" as an excuse.

[QUOTE="Mike1978Smith"]You know what I just realized? Ghostbusters. Case. In. Point. PS3/360 get their version, and Wii get ours. And ours looks pretty damn good! You can't claim one version is better or worse than the other, because each version brings it's own stuff to the table. If you go to the Ghostbusters Wii forum, there's even a guy who posted that he will be purchasing both the PS3 versions and the Wii version. So why is it Atari can make multiple versions of a game, yet Capcom can not? And why is it so many people on this forum can't see how Wii can have our own versions that are NOT just chopped down ports. Saying no to "me-too" games means saying no to games like Ghostbusters. Are you sure you want to say that?Haziqonfire

I know I already replied to this, but I wanted to make a separate reply.

So what you're saying is that you actually are FOR "me-too" games, so long as they are released simultaneously with the other versions?

Does this mean that if Capcom had done the same thing with RE5 as Atari did with Ghostbusters, yuo would be cool with RE5:Wii?

So really your entire argument is not that the Wii should not get "me-too" games, but rather it needs to have all it's "me-too" games released alongside the other versions.

Correct me if I'm wrong, here.

Either you are against "me-too" games, like Ghostbusters, or you are for them. If all we are debating is release dates, then I think your entire argument kind of falls apart, don't you?

I don't think this is the intention of the original post, but I'll just give my piece in response to the more recent replies.

I don't mind when people ask for stuff, but every time a game is announced or rumored, people start whining, saying either it's not what they want or it's not going to be what they want. Most of the people on the "other side" in this thread are not the same ones who do this, though. You understand, as do most of us, that different people enjoy different things. I'm not asking anyone to love Umbrella Chronicles, but I'd like to be able to talk about it without being accused by some of ruining the Wii by buying games like it. They have the right to do that, granted, but it just isn't needed.

(The following isn't meant to be a direct analogy, just an example of an attitude.) Let's say I'm a big fan of Star Tropics, which I am. I'd love to see another game in that franchise. There's no problem with that, right? But let's say a random new game is announced by Nintendo, and all I can say about it is "it's not Star Tropics" and "don't support this game because it's not Star Tropics." That's just not realistic. People might really enjoy the new game that Nintendo announced, but I keep saying that it's not what I want so nobody should enjoy it. This is the type of thing that I see too often in this forum. Again, it's not from everyone, but it's the type of attitude that I think this thread combats, even if that's not the intention.

I don't think this is the intention of the original post, but I'll just give my piece in response to the more recent replies.

I don't mind when people ask for stuff, but every time a game is announced or rumored, people start whining, saying either it's not what they want or it's not going to be what they want. Most of the people on the "other side" in this thread are not the same ones who do this, though. You understand, as do most of us, that different people enjoy different things. I'm not asking anyone to love Umbrella Chronicles, but I'd like to be able to talk about it without being accused by some of ruining the Wii by buying games like it. They have the right to do that, granted, but it just isn't needed.

(The following isn't meant to be a direct analogy, just an example of an attitude.) Let's say I'm a big fan of Star Tropics, which I am. I'd love to see another game in that franchise. There's no problem with that, right? But let's say a random new game is announced by Nintendo, and all I can say about it is "it's not Star Tropics" and "don't support this game because it's not Star Tropics." That's just not realistic. People might really enjoy the new game that Nintendo announced, but I keep saying that it's not what I want so nobody should enjoy it. This is the type of thing that I see too often in this forum. Again, it's not from everyone, but it's the type of attitude that I think this thread combats, even if that's not the intention.

JordanElek

The biggest thing is that we are all able to speak with our money. The whining may be annoying and bothersome but at the end of the day, you speak with your money and everyone will speak with theres. Critcism towards anothers opinion is just natural, it will always happen so that's something that has to be dealt with sadly. And also, isn't constant bashing simply to annoy others considered trolling anyway?

I agree with Haziq, and have thought this for some time now. However, apparently Dead Space was being developed on the original Xbox until they switched it over to the 360. Im guessing it took so long because they wanted to make it multiplatform and make more money off of it thus decreasing the risk of a new IP.

If I want Assassins Creed or Street Fighter, I'll buy a 360. I am grateful some companies are making games built from the ground up, and I hope more devs follow the examples of Umbrella Chronicles, Overlord: Dark Legend and Dead Space Extraction.

I dont understand the hatred people give to rail shooters. Theyre pretty fun, and Umbrella Chronicles was pretty damngood.

Question is: Should you blame consumers for simply wanting certain games, or the Wii for causing this "Me too" syndrome?

I am really pissed at Nintendo. I got a Wii thinking it would be awesome, boy was I wrong. I mean, I went looking for games and out of the couple hundred there are for the thing I only found like 10 I actually considered buying. About 1/4 of those flopped, 1/4 were pushed back, and the other 1/2 I still plan on buying. It's the thing though, I currently own only 1 Wii game, Super Mario Galaxy, and the only upcoming game I want is The Conduit. Unless Nintendo announces some pretty good games tomorrow @ GDC, I'm done.

I think that's why me, and some others want Wii versions of the other games since Wii owners are missing out on all the good titles on the 360/PS3. :(

Question is: Should you blame consumers for simply wanting certain games, or the Wii for causing this "Me too" syndrome?

Heydanbud92

You blame the people and their unrealistic expectations

I am really pissed at Nintendo. I got a Wii thinking it would be awesome, boy was I wrong. I mean, I went looking for games and out of the couple hundred there are for the thing I only found like 10 I actually considered buying. About 1/4 of those flopped, 1/4 were pushed back, and the other 1/2 I still plan on buying. It's the thing though, I currently own only 1 Wii game, Super Mario Galaxy, and the only upcoming game I want is The Conduit. Unless Nintendo announces some pretty good games tomorrow @ GDC, I'm done.

I think that's why me, and some others want Wii versions of the other games since Wii owners are missing out on all the good titles on the 360/PS3. :(

_LiquidFlame_

So wait

You made an uninformed purchase (by your own words) and yet you're somehow mad at Nintendo

You're the one that bought something without researching it, the blame lies 100% in/on/around you

This is a really good post. I'm sick of them to, the guys who insist that the Wii needs to have some of the good games on PS3 or 360. That's only because they feel left out, and I kinda feel sorry for those guys who get there hopes up on stuff like this.

My oppinion, the Wii isn't the only current console you should have. Getting a PS3 or 360 will make you completely forget about these, "Me Too" games and if more people had a Wii and a (preferably) PS3, maybe posts like that would go down a bit.

I think this argument has never had any substance. Basically Haziq and those pro-haziq are saying they dont want downgraded versions of games that you find on the PS3 and 360. What people like me are saying is that we don't want those same games we just want games of that caliber instead of ports of 10 year old games and rail shooters. Haziq talks about how the Wii should be a place for new and innovative ideas, but rail shooters are one of the oldest and most abused genres in gaming. The only reason it works at all is because of IR, but I can name a bakers dozen of mini game collections that let you do the same thing. Take RE4 on the Wii, it barely took advantage of the Wii because it wasn't built for the Wii, I think a port of RE5 would be just like that. Some nice additions like using motiion for the knife and maybe melee attacks, and improved aiming but still not stratching the surface of what it could be on the Wii. Take a RE game built for the Wii, with enemies designed with the Wii's added accuracy in mind, weapons that take advantage of motion control, catering the environments to be interactive with motions like in MP3, imagine something like having a zombie or whatever lunge at you and you use the Wiimote to stab it in the head as it grabs you, or being able to do moves like punches or breaking a neck on demand with motions. And there is alot more you can do with a RE game built specifically for the Wii that cant be done in a port. Instead we get a rail shooter is just point shoot, turn, point shoot, turn and on and on. So no its not about give me RE5 and SFIV, its give me a game on the level of RE5 and SFIV which is certainly not Umbrella Chronicles. Its Mario, its Madworld, its No More Heroes, potentially The Conduit. So if your saying we should stop asking for games like that or stop desiring games like that, my response to you and all those who agree with you is that you shouldn't have a console at all. I have all three consoles and I would like great games on all three consoles, you didn't see back in the SNES days when people say "if you want MK in all its glory but a Genesis" No people said we want MK in all its glory on our console of choice and thats what we got. Sepewrath

I see what your saying and you make a good point -- and I understand what some of you guys want -- but again I was mainly talking about those complaining about me too versions -- those who actually want RE5 on the Wii or SFIV on the Wii.

(The following isn't meant to be a direct analogy, just an example of an attitude.) Let's say I'm a big fan of Star Tropics, which I am. I'd love to see another game in that franchise. There's no problem with that, right? But let's say a random new game is announced by Nintendo, and all I can say about it is "it's not Star Tropics" and "don't support this game because it's not Star Tropics." That's just not realistic. People might really enjoy the new game that Nintendo announced, but I keep saying that it's not what I want so nobody should enjoy it. This is the type of thing that I see too often in this forum. Again, it's not from everyone, but it's the type of attitude that I think this thread combats, even if that's not the intention.

JordanElek

I see your point with that, and I agree it's silly to put down a game simply because it's not what you want.

But to be honest, this thread isn't about people dogging on games like RE Chronicles or Castlevania Judgement. It's about people who want "me-too" games. I know that most of time those people are one in the same, but we need to separate the two issues. "Me-too"ers are simply lashing out at those spin offs, simply because they feel taunted by them. It's like rubbing the fact that they can't have the real thing in their face. but that's neither here, nor there, as we want to focus on the "me-too" games, not their scapegoats.

Let me hit your analogy up with an analogy of my own. You're a Star Tropics fan and would love to see a new game in the franchise. During E3, a new Star Tropics is announced, but it's only for PS3 and 360. The game looks awesome, and a worthy successor to the franchise. Now you're bummed, because it came out on a console you don't own. Next thing you know, the developer of Star Tropics announces there will be an entry to the franchise on the Wii, as well. Your hopes are up! But then you find out it's just a dirt bike racing game with Star Tropics characters and areas. "That's not a Start Tropics game," you think, " that's something completely different.

Then when you display your disappointment and your desire for a real Star Tropics game for the Wii, you get blasted for "buying the wrong console". "I bought the damn thing when it first came out, how was I supposed to know it was the 'wrong' console to play games on?"

I see what your saying and you make a good point -- and I understand what some of you guys want -- but again I was mainly talking about those complaining about me too versions -- those who actually want RE5 on the Wii or SFIV on the Wii.

Haziqonfire

So to clarify, "me-too" games and the people that want them are completely ok by your standards, you are just tired of people wanting PS3 versions of games for the wii. That about sum it up?

[QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]

I see what your saying and you make a good point -- and I understand what some of you guys want -- but again I was mainly talking about those complaining about me too versions -- those who actually want RE5 on the Wii or SFIV on the Wii.

Mike1978Smith

So to clarify, "me-too" games and the people that want them are completely ok by your standards, you are just tired of people wanting PS3 versions of games for the wii. That about sum it up?

The Wii is a console based off of the idea to be unique, to take risks, to get indie developers to make new, unique IPs or take established IPs and re-invent/mix up the formula. It is a console that can give you access to doing all these, without suffering a loss, due to its relatively cheaper development costs.

Haziqonfire

ok so this is the part where the word st*pid is spelled, the worst part of your post that we can all agree is the RISKS part! i am sorry i dont see absolutely nothing relesed risky on the wii, or do you consider a risk of nintendo puting its fate in the hands of 90% showelware titles on wii? my pet this, my pet that, scratch me here ,touch me there i want to be a princess yupi weepe yey i am riding a horsey ^_^ sooo cutsy ahhh ninty your the only one benefiting from all this...

[QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]

The Wii is a console based off of the idea to be unique, to take risks, to get indie developers to make new, unique IPs or take established IPs and re-invent/mix up the formula. It is a console that can give you access to doing all these, without suffering a loss, due to its relatively cheaper development costs.

nezardm

ok so this is the part where the word st*pid is spelled, the worst part of your post that we can all agree is the RISKS part! i am sorry i dont see absolutely nothing relesed risky on the wii, or do you consider a risk of nintendo puting its fate in the hands of 90% showelware titles on wii? my pet this, my pet that, scratch me here ,touch me there i want to be a princess yupi weepe yey i am riding a horsey ^_^ sooo cutsy ahhh ninty your the only one benefiting from all this...

[QUOTE="nezardm"]

[QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]

The Wii is a console based off of the idea to be unique, to take risks, to get indie developers to make new, unique IPs or take established IPs and re-invent/mix up the formula. It is a console that can give you access to doing all these, without suffering a loss, due to its relatively cheaper development costs.

Haziqonfire

ok so this is the part where the word st*pid is spelled, the worst part of your post that we can all agree is the RISKS part! i am sorry i dont see absolutely nothing relesed risky on the wii, or do you consider a risk of nintendo puting its fate in the hands of 90% showelware titles on wii? my pet this, my pet that, scratch me here ,touch me there i want to be a princess yupi weepe yey i am riding a horsey ^_^ sooo cutsy ahhh ninty your the only one benefiting from all this...

i am sorry what part is the problem for you to accept? what kind of a proof do you need for the 90% shovelware?

1.please get up and talke a walk (i am sorry a ride, no one walks any more) to your nearest shoping center.

2. get yourself some how to the wii's games shelf.

3. and try to have a look and say what kind of games do you see.

and the part shovelware is rarely profitable, well is profiting very well on the wii coz theres nothing else you can get!

[QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]

[QUOTE="nezardm"]

ok so this is the part where the word st*pid is spelled, the worst part of your post that we can all agree is the RISKS part! i am sorry i dont see absolutely nothing relesed risky on the wii, or do you consider a risk of nintendo puting its fate in the hands of 90% showelware titles on wii? my pet this, my pet that, scratch me here ,touch me there i want to be a princess yupi weepe yey i am riding a horsey ^_^ sooo cutsy ahhh ninty your the only one benefiting from all this...

nezardm

i am sorry what part is the problem for you to accept? what kind of a proof do you need for the 90% shovelware?

1.please get up and talke a walk (i am sorry a ride, no one walks any more) to your nearest shoping center.

2. get yourself some how to the wii's games shelf.

3. and try to have a look and say what kind of games do you see.

and the part shovelware is rarely profitable, well is profiting very well on the wii coz theres nothing else you can get!

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Over there in the pro-multiplat camp, people want current-gen ports or equivalent offerings in the major franchises seeing releases on other plats. Want. They wish the Wii could have these things. Wish. They think the Wii should have these things. Should. Over there in the anti-'me too' camp, people are strenuously arguing that current-gen ports do not work. Do. They say those ports are not good. Are. They say the pro-multiplat people bought the wrong console if they don't want these rail-shooter side-stories because Wii IS the platform for rail-shooters and the games they want are the ones the Wii does not have. Is and have. The pro-multiplat camp speaks in Wants, Wishes, and Shoulds. The anti-'me too' camp speaks in Does, Is, and Has. The latter are so firmly planted in reality that they can't comprehend the other side, who speak in hypotheticals. But what "Is" doesn't trump what "Should" be, and "Has" doesn't trump "Want". Presenting arguments about what is the case and what the Wii currently has doesn't knock down arguments for what should be the case and what they want the Wii to have. There is nothing necessary about the current reality. To say that a port of a current-gen game to Wii will necessarily and always be the inferior version is to accept the notion that graphics are the ultimate standard by which quality is judged. So I say to the anti-'me too' camp, if that's truly how you feel, then perhaps it's actually YOU who bought the wrong console. ;)clicketyclick

I agree but only to the extent that developers shouldn't just assume something isn't going to work just because it's on Wii or that the Wii should never get Multi-plats. However you can not deny that there are games out there that just won't work on other platforms due to their very nature. And it's not just 360/PS3 to Wii, it works both ways. There are tons of Wii games that are impossible to transfer over to the other consoles without losing what made them good. Who actually thought the 360 version of Rayman Raving Rabbids was good and do you honestly think Wii Sports or WarioWare Smooth Moves would be half as good without the Wii Remote? The same applys to the games that people envy on the 360 and PS3, games like Dead Rising, Resident Evil 5 and Fallout 3 are designed from the ground up to take advantage of what makes consoles like the PS3 and 360 distinct from Wii, namely, hardware power. When those games do move over, like Dead Rising did, they lose what was special about them and even the people that clamored for it don't want it anymore. I welcome multiplats to Wii if and when they can be done without losing what was special about the other versions (Guitar Hero, Rock Band) or if the Wii can make the game better (PES 2009, Sonic Unleashed, Shawn White).

Also, to the people arguing about how there should be no traditional games on Wii, I'm not saying traditional games have no place on Wii. Those who say that have either lost their minds or are sick of games anyway. When I fist saw the Wii Romote I didn't think, "great, let's throw away everything that's been done in the last 30 years and the industry can start fresh." I thought of how the remote could enhance and breath new life into the games we already play as well as contribute to the creation new types of games. That was the promise of the Wii and I don't think people should forget it.

You're a Star Tropics fan and would love to see a new game in the franchise. During E3, a new Star Tropics is announced, but it's only for PS3 and 360. The game looks awesome, and a worthy successor to the franchise. Now you're bummed, because it came out on a console you don't own. Next thing you know, the developer of Star Tropics announces there will be an entry to the franchise on the Wii, as well. Your hopes are up! But then you find out it's just a dirt bike racing game with Star Tropics characters and areas. "That's not a Start Tropics game," you think, " that's something completely different.

Then when you display your disappointment and your desire for a real Star Tropics game for the Wii, you get blasted for "buying the wrong console". "I bought the damn thing when it first came out, how was I supposed to know it was the 'wrong' console to play games on?"

Mike1978Smith

I'd buy a 360, simple as that. I love the franchise that much, and I'm not just saying that to bolster my argument. I've been looking for a reason to justify the purchase of another console, and that would EASILY push me over the edge. I might consider the Star Tropics dirt bike racing game too, but I'm not a big fan of the genre, so I'd probably pass it up. But I certainly wouldn't condemn dirt bike fans for buying it. I already got the game I wanted elsewhere.

[QUOTE="Mike1978Smith"]You're a Star Tropics fan and would love to see a new game in the franchise. During E3, a new Star Tropics is announced, but it's only for PS3 and 360. The game looks awesome, and a worthy successor to the franchise. Now you're bummed, because it came out on a console you don't own. Next thing you know, the developer of Star Tropics announces there will be an entry to the franchise on the Wii, as well. Your hopes are up! But then you find out it's just a dirt bike racing game with Star Tropics characters and areas. "That's not a Start Tropics game," you think, " that's something completely different.

Then when you display your disappointment and your desire for a real Star Tropics game for the Wii, you get blasted for "buying the wrong console". "I bought the damn thing when it first came out, how was I supposed to know it was the 'wrong' console to play games on?"

JordanElek

I'd buy a 360, simple as that. I love the franchise that much, and I'm not just saying that to bolster my argument. I've been looking for a reason to justify the purchase of another console, and that would EASILY push me over the edge. I might consider the Star Tropics dirt bike racing game too, but I'm not a big fan of the genre, so I'd probably pass it up. But I certainly wouldn't condemn dirt bike fans for buying it. I already got the game I wanted elsewhere.

[QUOTE="Mike1978Smith"]You're a Star Tropics fan and would love to see a new game in the franchise. During E3, a new Star Tropics is announced, but it's only for PS3 and 360. The game looks awesome, and a worthy successor to the franchise. Now you're bummed, because it came out on a console you don't own. Next thing you know, the developer of Star Tropics announces there will be an entry to the franchise on the Wii, as well. Your hopes are up! But then you find out it's just a dirt bike racing game with Star Tropics characters and areas. "That's not a Start Tropics game," you think, " that's something completely different.

Then when you display your disappointment and your desire for a real Star Tropics game for the Wii, you get blasted for "buying the wrong console". "I bought the damn thing when it first came out, how was I supposed to know it was the 'wrong' console to play games on?"

JordanElek

I'd buy a 360, simple as that. I love the franchise that much, and I'm not just saying that to bolster my argument. I've been looking for a reason to justify the purchase of another console, and that would EASILY push me over the edge. I might consider the Star Tropics dirt bike racing game too, but I'm not a big fan of the genre, so I'd probably pass it up. But I certainly wouldn't condemn dirt bike fans for buying it. I already got the game I wanted elsewhere.

Another point I made was the fact that people complain when we get say, Darkside Chronicles instead of a RE5 like RE exclusively for the Wii -- for me, I accept it because its still going to take advantage of the Wii's hardware. I'm not saying everyone should be excited for it/pick it up -- I'm saying people just shouldn't call it crap because its not what they wanted.Haziqonfire

That's why people lash out at those games. It's like "Get this cheeseburger out of my face!" lol

It's not fair to hate on those games, but they're still kind of a slap in the face.

And do we honestly believe so many people would rather piss and moan over not having a game like RE5 if they could just go out and buy another console to play it?Mike1978Smith

And is is also equally ridiculous to think that the number one selling console of this generation should get these popular titles?Mike1978Smith

And is is also equally ridiculous to think that the number one selling console of this generation should get these popular titles? Mike1978Smith

When Sonic beat Mario in the 16bit gen what happened to people who wanted to play Sonic?

No, it's not ridiculous at all. But like Haziq pointed out and you demonstrated with Ghostbusters, for some reason we're not seeing developers put those popular titles on the Wii as part of the whole package. They're an afterthought in most cases, and they haven't turned out well. (Yes, clickety, I'm speaking in reality.) It doesn't have to be that way, and change is what you guys are calling for, and that's fine. But the alternative games that we're getting now (a few rail shooters, for example) also aren't a bad thing. That's really my only point.

JordanElek

I do think change is needed. Hopefully devs will look at Ghostbusters and think "Oh, we can do that?" When they realize completely different versions of the same game is the way to go.

[QUOTE="Mike1978Smith"] And is is also equally ridiculous to think that the number one selling console of this generation should get these popular titles? Jaysonguy

When Sonic beat Mario in the 16bit gen what happened to people who wanted to play Sonic?

I do think change is needed. Hopefully devs will look at Ghostbusters and think "Oh, we can do that?" When they realize completely different versions of the same game is the way to go.Mike1978Smith

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

Over there in the pro-multiplat camp, people want current-gen ports or equivalent offerings in the major franchises seeing releases on other plats. Want. They wish the Wii could have these things. Wish. They think the Wii should have these things. Should.

Over there in the anti-'me too' camp, people are strenuously arguing that current-gen ports do not work. Do. They say those ports are not good. Are. They say the pro-multiplat people bought the wrong console if they don't want these rail-shooter side-stories because Wii IS the platform for rail-shooters and the games they want are the ones the Wii does not have. Is and Have.

The pro-multiplat camp speaks in Wants, Wishes, and Shoulds. The anti-'me too' camp speaks in Does, Is, and Has. The latter are so firmly planted in reality that they can't comprehend the other side, who speak in hypotheticals. But what "Is" doesn't trump what "Should" be, and "Has" doesn't trump "Want". Presenting arguments about what is the case and what the Wii currently has doesn't knock down arguments for what should be the case and what they want the Wii to have. There is nothing necessary about the current reality.

To say that a port of a current-gen game to Wii will necessarily and always be the inferior version is to accept the notion that graphics are the ultimate standard by which quality is judged. So I say to the anti-'me too' camp, if that's truly how you feel, then perhaps it's actually YOU who bought the wrong console. ;)Master_Hermes

I agree but only to the extent that developers shouldn't just assume something isn't going to work just because it's on Wii or that the Wii should never get Multi-plats. However you can not deny that there are games out there that just won't work on other platforms due to their very nature. And it's not just 360/PS3 to Wii, it works both ways. There are tons of Wii games that are impossible to transfer over to the other consoles without losing what made them good. Who actually thought the 360 version of Rayman Raving Rabbids was good and do you honestly think Wii Sports or WarioWare Smooth Moves would be half as good without the Wii Remote? The same applys to the games that people envy on the 360 and PS3, games like Dead Rising, Resident Evil 5 and Fallout 3 are designed from the ground up to take advantage of what makes consoles like the PS3 and 360 distinct from Wii, namely, hardware power. When those games do move over, like Dead Rising did, they lose what was special about them and even the people that clamored for it don't want it anymore. I welcome multiplats to Wii if and when they can be done without losing what was special about the other versions (Guitar Hero, Rock Band) or if the Wii can make the game better (PES 2009, Sonic Unleashed, Shawn White).

All you say is that there are Wii games that are "impossible" to port because they'd be "losing what made them good". Kinda ambiguous. You later imply that what made them good was the wiimote. Now that the problem has been identified, is it actually true that it's impossible to port them over? No. ;)

You then compared the incorrect conclusion that it'd be "impossible" to port those wii games to 360/PS3 to the "impossibility" of porting 360/PS3 games to Wii. You state that they depend on "hardware power" and again ambiguously say they would be "losing what was special about them" when ported to Wii. Being more specific, they were built from the ground up on these plats to take advantage of hardware power... in order to perform technical feats with graphics: draw distances, high res textures, bump-mapping, lighting effects, particle effects, water effects, moar lens flare.

These are all very nice touches that help immerse players, but PC games, which are more on the cutting edge of these effects, always allow the option to turn down or turn off these effects in order to speed up performance on older compys. Are these gamers not playing the same game? Are they playing some other, vastly inferior knockoff just because they turned down the settings? Hardly.

Graphical effects enhance the experience, but they don't MAKE the experience. Dialing down texture detail, removing some advanced graphical effects, even sacrificing draw distance is acceptable, and similar to running your PC game on low settings. But when the compensation for this is tighter controls, the edge might actually be with the game on "lower settings".

You have to be careful about using examples of what are actually just lazy port jobs in order to illustrate your point that it's impossible to port these games over without them being inferior. After all, when The Orange Box was ported to PS3, it was quite inferior, with long load times and constant framerate drops. That's just sloppy porting, not a reflection on the possibility of porting games from PC/360 to PS3.

all this talk that we are having here is just hapoof! air, empty...nothing.For the wii its too late, develpments and attention to it is starting way way to late, if we can hope anything is that the next nintendoes console will be a step fowared not five back...

[QUOTE="Master_Hermes"]

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

Over there in the pro-multiplat camp, people want current-gen ports or equivalent offerings in the major franchises seeing releases on other plats. Want. They wish the Wii could have these things. Wish. They think the Wii should have these things. Should.

Over there in the anti-'me too' camp, people are strenuously arguing that current-gen ports do not work. Do. They say those ports are not good. Are. They say the pro-multiplat people bought the wrong console if they don't want these rail-shooter side-stories because Wii IS the platform for rail-shooters and the games they want are the ones the Wii does not have. Is and Have.

The pro-multiplat camp speaks in Wants, Wishes, and Shoulds. The anti-'me too' camp speaks in Does, Is, and Has. The latter are so firmly planted in reality that they can't comprehend the other side, who speak in hypotheticals. But what "Is" doesn't trump what "Should" be, and "Has" doesn't trump "Want". Presenting arguments about what is the case and what the Wii currently has doesn't knock down arguments for what should be the case and what they want the Wii to have. There is nothing necessary about the current reality.

To say that a port of a current-gen game to Wii will necessarily and always be the inferior version is to accept the notion that graphics are the ultimate standard by which quality is judged. So I say to the anti-'me too' camp, if that's truly how you feel, then perhaps it's actually YOU who bought the wrong console. ;)clicketyclick

I agree but only to the extent that developers shouldn't just assume something isn't going to work just because it's on Wii or that the Wii should never get Multi-plats. However you can not deny that there are games out there that just won't work on other platforms due to their very nature. And it's not just 360/PS3 to Wii, it works both ways. There are tons of Wii games that are impossible to transfer over to the other consoles without losing what made them good. Who actually thought the 360 version of Rayman Raving Rabbids was good and do you honestly think Wii Sports or WarioWare Smooth Moves would be half as good without the Wii Remote? The same applys to the games that people envy on the 360 and PS3, games like Dead Rising, Resident Evil 5 and Fallout 3 are designed from the ground up to take advantage of what makes consoles like the PS3 and 360 distinct from Wii, namely, hardware power. When those games do move over, like Dead Rising did, they lose what was special about them and even the people that clamored for it don't want it anymore. I welcome multiplats to Wii if and when they can be done without losing what was special about the other versions (Guitar Hero, Rock Band) or if the Wii can make the game better (PES 2009, Sonic Unleashed, Shawn White).

All you say is that there are Wii games that are "impossible" to port because they'd be "losing what made them good". Kinda ambiguous. You later imply that what made them good was the wiimote. Now that the problem has been identified, is it actually true that it's impossible to port them over? No. ;)

You then compared the incorrect conclusion that it'd be "impossible" to port those wii games to 360/PS3 to the "impossibility" of porting 360/PS3 games to Wii. You state that they depend on "hardware power" and again ambiguously say they would be "losing what was special about them" when ported to Wii. Being more specific, they were built from the ground up on these plats to take advantage of hardware power... in order to perform technical feats with graphics: draw distances, high res textures, bump-mapping, lighting effects, particle effects, water effects, moar lens flare.

These are all very nice touches that help immerse players, but PC games, which are more on the cutting edge of these effects, always allow the option to turn down or turn off these effects in order to speed up performance on older compys. Are these gamers not playing the same game? Are they playing some other, vastly inferior knockoff just because they turned down the settings? Hardly.

Graphical effects enhance the experience, but they don't MAKE the experience. Dialing down texture detail, removing some advanced graphical effects, even sacrificing draw distance is acceptable, and similar to running your PC game on low settings. But when the compensation for this is tighter controls, the edge might actually be with the game on "lower settings".

You have to be careful about using examples of what are actually just lazy port jobs in order to illustrate your point that it's impossible to port these games over without them being inferior. After all, when The Orange Box was ported to PS3, it was quite inferior, with long load times and constant framerate drops. That's just sloppy porting, not a reflection on the possibility of porting games from PC/360 to PS3.

How many 360 and PS3 will actually use that controller (especially a 3rd party one at that)? I doubt very many. Publishers aren't willing to develop games specifically for a remote almost no one has and most companies will not be willing to pack it in. Also, graphics are not the only thing hardware power gives us, again, Dead Rising is a good example. Chop till' You Drop isn't just an uglier version of the 360 original. without the 360's power there were far less zombies on screen at one time and one of the games biggest features was destroying zombies en mass. You also lost the photography elements of the original. Hardware power isn't just graphics, it's A.I and physics and a lot of other things too. On top of all, if deveoplers do try and bring a game over it just can't be a port like most multiplat PS3 games. Even if a game is seemingly possible on Wii, it most likely has to be re-built from the ground up and that takes time and money, time and money publishers aren't willing to spend on something that will be inferior by its very nature and will probably sell less. The power and control barriers between Wii and 360/PS3 are more important than you think.

Also, your PC analogy doesn't work. Downgrading like that may work for PC to PS3 to 360 games but it can't for Wii. The power gulf between your average gaming PC and the PS3/360 is miniscule compared to the gulf between PS3/360 and Wii. Imagine I pop in Crysis into a PC running a first gen P4 and a 64MB GPU with pixel shader 1.0, it's not going to run on any setting.

How many 360 and PS3 will actually use that controller (especially a 3rd party one at that)? I doubt very many. Publishers aren't willing to develop games specifically for a remote almost no one has and most companies will not be willing to pack it in.Master_Hermes

Also, graphics are not the only thing hardware power gives us, again, Dead Rising is a good example. Chop till' You Drop isn't just an uglier version of the 360 original. without the 360's power there were far less zombies on screen at one time and one of the games biggest features was destroying zombies en mass. Hardware power isn't just graphics, it's A.I and physics and a lot of other things too. Master_Hermes

On top of all, if deveoplers do try and bring a game over it just can't be a port like most multiplat PS3 games. Even if a game is seemingly possible on Wii, it most likely has to be re-built from the ground up and that takes time and money, time and money publishers aren't willing to spend on something that will be inferior by its very nature and will probably sell less. The power and control barriers between Wii and 360/PS3 are more important than you think.Master_Hermes

Guitar Hero is much worse on the Wii than on the PS3 and 360.

I agree. Nintendo needs to be more frontline in its game production.

Guitar Hero is much worse on the Wii than on the PS3 and 360.

I agree. Nintendo needs to be more frontline in its game production.

im_really_rich