Downloadable Games not Counting is stupid

I've been reading since Swords & Soliders on WiiWare got AAe, that downloadable games don't count, apparently SW decided this, and you know what i say? BS.

Thats how you repay the people who made a good Tower Defense game called Comet Crash? They can't get their game to retail, they get it to PSN, make the best game they can make, and you repay them with spiting in their face saying their game doesn't count when reviewing what good games are on the platform its on.

Thats silly. Just coz a game is smaller in scope, smaller in price, doesn't mean it shouldn't count. If games like Castle Crashers, Comet Crash, Swords & Soldiers can manage to outperform full retail titles we should not just accept them with our wallets, but with our opinions too.

You guys can go on with saying these games don't count, but if someone asks me "hey what games can i get only on Xbox 360 i can't get anywhere else that are really cool? like a game that will make me prooud to have chosen to buy this console over the other one since i couldn't afford both" i'd tell them get Castle Crashers, Geometry Wars 2.

And why not count downloadable PC games? Seriously. PC makes so much money off DL games. So if Burnout Paradise had never come out at retail, and i bought it on PSN it doesn't count? ("oh but its sold at stores it counts")

Anyone else think not counting Downloadable games towards a consoles's library is stupid?

We should accept all PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, DS, DSiware, WiiWare, Xbox Live Arcade, Playstation Network games. Coz no mater what the scope, size, price, of these games they can still kick enuff butt to get a 7 or a 9.5.

They count in talking about good games, but in the SW application of ownage, they don't count, because they aren't held up to as high standards as regular retail games. Wii owners were fine about this until they got another AAE wiiware game...pyromaniac223

I agree, but for some reason, System Wars has wacky standards. I've tried fighting this argument before - all I got were illogical reasoning and insults flung my way.DonPerian

this is stupid, i bought my Wii and PS3 to buy downoadable games too

It should be a sign of how bad retail games are in general if I enjoy Lost Winds, Pixel Junk Monsters, N+, Geometry Wars 2 more than Frontlines, Turning Point, Lair, Haze, and guess what? Too Human, Mercs 2, and even AAA retail games

I don't like MLB the Show 09 as much as playing Pixel Junk Eden.

Not counting these games is disrespectful to the developers who worked hard to make them.

So what if you wouldn't pay $60 for Pixel Junk Monsters? I wouldn't pay $60 for InFamous, or Fable 2. Doesn't mean I won't pick them up when their $20. I love Paradise, but i didn't pay $60 for it, I waited til it dropped to $20 on PSN and downloaded it.

If World of Goo, or Braid can actually hang with Super Smash Bros Brawl, and Gears of War 2 when it comes to GOTY time for their respective platforms, that means they count.

Games are games. If they are original, they count. If they cost $60, they wouldn't score as well as they do. Value is based on price to content value ratio. It doesn't matter if its sold on a shelf or not.

Games are games. If they are original, they count. If they cost $60, they wouldn't score as well as they do. Value is based on price to content value ratio. It doesn't matter if its sold on a shelf or not.

foxhound_fox

True. I think a game, no matter its size or price, should deliver as much content as possible, $60 worth of content is a great target to aim for whether you're going to pay $5 for the game or $60.

It's not that they shouldn't count. It's that comparing a $10 title to a $60 full fledged game isn't fair on many counts.Couth_

Now that I don't agree with...because it's scalable. If that $10 was $60 but didn't have any more content, it would get thrashed in reviews. but it's not $60, it's $10...and you're getting way more than $10 worth of entertainment (in the case of AA and AAA titles of course, not the down-loadable shovelware).

Sure these games are smaller, shorter, and have smaller budgets, but that's offset by the lower price point.

[QUOTE="Couth_"]It's not that they shouldn't count. It's that comparing a $10 title to a $60 full fledged game isn't fair on many counts.goblaa

Now that I don't agree with...because it's scalable. If that $10 was $60 but didn't have any more content, it would get thrashed in reviews. but it's not $60, it's $10...and you're getting way more than $10 worth of entertainment (in the case of AA and AAA titles of course, not the down-loadable shovelware).

Sure these games are smaller, shorter, and have smaller budgets, but that's offset by the lower price point.

Exactly. Your making an exception for the game because it's cheaper. I'm not saying that's wrong, but there is too much to consider when comparing a $10 title to a $60 one, which is why it's simply not done. I'm not saying they shouldn't "count". But they can't be compared, which is the primary reason why they don't "coun't". (Pesonally I don't care what the hell does or doesn't count, I just play games)Couth_

[QUOTE="Couth_"]Exactly. Your making an exception for the game because it's cheaper. I'm not saying that's wrong, but there is too much to consider when comparing a $10 title to a $60 one, which is why it's simply not done. I'm not saying they shouldn't "count". But they can't be compared, which is the primary reason why they don't "coun't". (Pesonally I don't care what the hell does or doesn't count, I just play games)foxhound_fox

I'm not arguing if they count or not, I'm not saying they should or shouldn't count, so save me your opinion. I am offering my take on why they don't count, and that's pretty much it.

All games availible on a platform should count. How much they count is what we should be debating.

This nonesense about comparing consoles on their number of AAA/AA games as seen by GS needs to stop.

No, you know what? They don't count. As you can see they are absent from GS's list, which is linked on the "Welcome to System Wars" sticky

I'm not arguing if they count or not, I'm not saying they should or shouldn't count, so save me your opinion. I am offering my take on why they don't count, and that's pretty much it.

Couth_

[QUOTE="Couth_"]No, you know what? They don't count. As you can see they are absent from GS's list, which is linked on the "Welcome to System Wars" sticky

I'm not arguing if they count or not, I'm not saying they should or shouldn't count, so save me your opinion. I am offering my take on why they don't count, and that's pretty much it.

foxhound_fox

this all started w/ xbla getting great games while psn and wii still didnt have anything...Now, its different. THey should be counted, but maybe counted seperately... is that so difficult?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="Couth_"]No, you know what? They don't count. As you can see they are absent from GS's list, which is linked on the "Welcome to System Wars" sticky

I'm not arguing if they count or not, I'm not saying they should or shouldn't count, so save me your opinion. I am offering my take on why they don't count, and that's pretty much it.

Couth_

how about we all conclude to never abide by that rule, which is stupid. just coz it isn't in a thread or is in a thread is dumb. His point is valid. Games are games. I can't see anything us gamers gain by not counting these games, why should these ppl make them for us if we treat them like this?

Just because a $10 game has an easier time to deliver $10 worth of value doesn't mean its unfair to compare it to a $60 game, that $60 game should deliver $60 worth of value, there are just as many $10 downloadable games that don't deliver $10 worth of value, same for $60 games.

Just coz some people agreed to it once on SW doesn't mean we all have to follow it. Is it against the TOS to count downloadable games when discussing the amount of quality games on a platform?

I say none of abide by that stupid rule. Someone delivers to you a stellar game, no matter where you get it, how much it cost, or its platform, if you like it and furthermore if this very site likes it, you should scream it to the masses to help gamers get their hands on a quality product.

It is stupid. Downloadable games should be conted, however to a degree. We have to factor in ports of retro titles and whatnot.skrat_01

i think all should count. Ninja Gaiden Sigma has some extra content than Black, but is mostly NGB in 1080p

Majora's Mask on VC has all the same content, but now in 480p.

Both games are essentially ports with better resolutions. One with new content, but what makes them good is the core game.

Would you buy the new content found in Sigma without the entire portion of the game that was in Black?

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]It is stupid. Downloadable games should be conted, however to a degree. We have to factor in ports of retro titles and whatnot.darth-pyschosis

i think all should count. Ninja Gaiden Sigma has some extra content than Black, but is mostly NGB in 1080p

Majora's Mask on VC has all the same content, but now in 480p.

Both games are essentially ports with better resolutions. One with new content, but what makes them good is the core game.

Would you buy the new content found in Sigma without the entire portion of the game that was in Black?

Ports of recent games, sure, but classic or retro titles, its a real hit and miss.

This also really conflicts with the PC side of things, as older titles i.e Fallout 1/2 are still sold at retail / online as DLC today - but dont exactly need, re-reviewing.

New online titles though, should be reviewed, DLC or not.

Hell I think mods could even be reviewed alongside retail games.... titles like The Nameless mod, even if they are modifications of older titles (e.g. Deus Ex) the quality surpasses RPGs of today in many respects.

Let's compare the AI, Graphics, Production values, Physics etc etc of downloadable games to full 60 dollar games and watch them get rated low.

[QUOTE="darth-pyschosis"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]It is stupid. Downloadable games should be conted, however to a degree. We have to factor in ports of retro titles and whatnot.skrat_01

i think all should count. Ninja Gaiden Sigma has some extra content than Black, but is mostly NGB in 1080p

Majora's Mask on VC has all the same content, but now in 480p.

Both games are essentially ports with better resolutions. One with new content, but what makes them good is the core game.

Would you buy the new content found in Sigma without the entire portion of the game that was in Black?

Ports of recent games, sure, but classic or retro titles, its a real hit and miss.

This also really conflicts with the PC side of things, as older titles i.e Fallout 1/2 are still sold at retail / online as DLC today - but dont exactly need, re-reviewing.

New online titles though, should be reviewed, DLC or not.

Hell I think mods could even be reviewed alongside retail games.... titles like The Nameless mod, even if they are modifications of older titles (e.g. Deus Ex) the quality surpasses RPGs of today in many respects.

And to you, True Dat! Very good points all around. Killing Floor got reviewed. I hear its really good. Its a mod. its $19.99. i hear it is worth it. I haven't played it, but i hear its good. Downloadable games, esspecially on PC should count. (Additionally I advise everyone to try Aquaria, solid Metroid-esque underwater adventure on PC. Try it!! on steam/D2D)

If whoever made it can give you a solid amount of quality no matter what else, if the game is good it should count. Heck, the bad games should count too of course so we can compare and know in greater detail why those games are bad and what makes other games good (for downloadable games that is)

Let's compare the AI, Graphics, Production values, Physics etc etc of downloadable games to full 60 dollar games and watch them get rated low.

Espada12

uhh and they'd win in some cases too. the Physics in SuperSonic Robot Acrobatic Cars is good. a lot of DL games have terrific production values. and their are more things to rate a game on then production values, physics, graphics, AI. I find Tetris to be A LOT more fun than Killzone 2.

Totally different games, but one delivers more fun and value to me.

A game can be rated for how much fun it is, its originality, its level design (i really think games this generation in general lack goo dlevel design but thats another arguement), can be rated for its replay value.

if Call of Duty 4 has no multiplayer it would be rated SO much lower because it has little replay value in the Single Player campaign, which last 6-8 hours while the game costs $60. Call of Duty 4 can have amazing AI, great graphics, great physics, and amazing production values, but without that replay value, the ingenuity people liked about the onlinemultiplayer, without the game being pure fun to people, it would be rated so much lower.

I don't recall AI, graphics, Productions values, or physics saving a game to me. It could make me rate it a point or two higher, but those alone can't overcome if a game is boring, not fun, or of little value. But if a game's core gameplay is fun, addictive, and it has replay value but has poor production values, poor AI, poor physics, poor graphics that core gameplay can be good enough to overcome those other problems and make a possible AAA game.

Puzzle Quest is a game I love. It has poor production values compared to other puzzle games, poor graphics compared to other puzzle games, and the AI cheats sometimes. But i love it, and the 1st Puzzle Quest got many AA, AAA reviews for its core fun gameplay mechanic of RPG/Match three hybrid adventure.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="darth-pyschosis"]

i think all should count. Ninja Gaiden Sigma has some extra content than Black, but is mostly NGB in 1080p

Majora's Mask on VC has all the same content, but now in 480p.

Both games are essentially ports with better resolutions. One with new content, but what makes them good is the core game.

Would you buy the new content found in Sigma without the entire portion of the game that was in Black?

darth-pyschosis

Ports of recent games, sure, but classic or retro titles, its a real hit and miss.

This also really conflicts with the PC side of things, as older titles i.e Fallout 1/2 are still sold at retail / online as DLC today - but dont exactly need, re-reviewing.

New online titles though, should be reviewed, DLC or not.

Hell I think mods could even be reviewed alongside retail games.... titles like The Nameless mod, even if they are modifications of older titles (e.g. Deus Ex) the quality surpasses RPGs of today in many respects.

And to you, True Dat! Very good points all around. Killing Floor got reviewed. I hear its really good. Its a mod. its $19.99. i hear it is worth it. I haven't played it, but i hear its good. Downloadable games, esspecially on PC should count. (Additionally I advise everyone to try Aquaria, solid Metroid-esque underwater adventure on PC. Try it!! on steam/D2D)

If whoever made it can give you a solid amount of quality no matter what else, if the game is good it should count. Heck, the bad games should count too of course so we can compare and know in greater detail why those games are bad and what makes other games good (for downloadable games that is)

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

Let's compare the AI, Graphics, Production values, Physics etc etc of downloadable games to full 60 dollar games and watch them get rated low.

darth-pyschosis

uhh and they'd win in some cases too. the Physics in SuperSonic Robot Acrobatic Cars is good. a lot of DL games have terrific production values. and their are more things to rate a game on then production values, physics, graphics, AI. I find Tetris to be A LOT more fun than Killzone 2.

Totally different games, but one delivers more fun and value to me.

A game can be rated for how much fun it is, its originality, its level design (i really think games this generation in general lack goo dlevel design but thats another arguement), can be rated for its replay value.

if Call of Duty 4 has no multiplayer it would be rated SO much lower because it has little replay value in the Single Player campaign, which last 6-8 hours while the game costs $60. Call of Duty 4 can have amazing AI, great graphics, great physics, and amazing production values, but without that replay value, the ingenuity people liked about the onlinemultiplayer, without the game being pure fun to people, it would be rated so much lower.

I don't recall AI, graphics, Productions values, or physics saving a game to me. It could make me rate it a point or two higher, but those alone can't overcome if a game is boring, not fun, or of little value. But if a game's core gameplay is fun, addictive, and it has replay value but has poor production values, poor AI, poor physics, poor graphics that core gameplay can be good enough to overcome those other problems and make a possible AAA game.

Puzzle Quest is a game I love. It has poor production values compared to other puzzle games, poor graphics compared to other puzzle games, and the AI cheats sometimes. But i love it, and the 1st Puzzle Quest got many AA, AAA reviews for its core fun gameplay mechanic of RPG/Match three hybrid adventure.

The point is call of duty does include the MP so don't say if and if when those aren't real scenario's. Hell even ND is learning from that mistake and putting MP in uncharted 2. Also the point is while in one area a DL game may be strong, if you compare say.. mario galaxy.. with braid.. that's not even remotely funny. Braid would be scored alot lower compared directly to Mario.

No one is saying you can't count Wiiware games to other PSN and XBLA games. It's when you compare Wiiware games to full retail $60 games you get a problem. They can't be compared because they have a different set of standards.

It's like comparing a $5 Iphone game to a $40 Nintendo DS retail game. Different standards, different price and different score value.

The problem I see with this is that GS does not have a comprehensive review policy for downloadable games. There are a whole lot of PC downloadable games that are not reviewed by GS (and I am talking about games that are of Braid quality, hell they did not even review braid for the PC yet), not to mention DLC like GTAIV and FO3, which have more content than some downloadable games that are reviewed.

So it is fairer to put a blancket exclusion of downloadable games than have some halfassed representation of them.

Could the same logic be applied to all Wii games?

Wii games are not up to the standard of 360/PS3 games and therefore should not be directly compared? So a Wii game getting 9.0 should be regarded as good 'for a Wii game' but not really comparable to something genuinely next gen. It would explain 'No More Heroes' getting 9's all over the place, that game would have been lucky to get a 6/10 if it was released for the 360.

*goes back under bridge*

Could the same logic be applied to all Wii games?

Wii games are not up to the standard of 360/PS3 games and therefore should not be directly compared? So a Wii game getting 9.0 should be regarded as good 'for a Wii game' but not really comparable to something genuinely next gen. It would explain 'No More Heroes' getting 9's all over the place, that game would have been lucky to get a 6/10 if it was released for the 360.

*goes back under bridge*

Elutheria

They do count but not in the same way as retail games. heres an example:

(example 1) The 360 has good games like GEOW 1/2, Halo 3, Braid and castle crashers- this is a bad argument because it gives the impression that arcade games have the same amount of content as big retail games.

(example 2) The 360 has good games like GEOW 1/2 and halo 3 along with greatarcade games for acheap price like Braid and castle crashers- this is a good argument because it seperates retail and downloadable games with out completely ignoring them.

I find it funny

PSN game gets AAA - "bu bu bu we should count DL games"

Xboxlive game gets AAA - "bu bu bu we should count DL games"

WiiWare game gets AA - "bu bu bu we should count DL games"

I think if we were going to count downloadable games, we'd need to count them seperately from retail games, so we wouldn't have Comet Crash being a match for Gears 2, or Geometry Wars 2 trumping Uncharted.

The problem with this is that downloadable PC games can have as much content as a retail game. So if we're going to have downloadables count, we need to decide on some guidelines that clarify the difference between a downloadable game that should be counted with the retail games, and one that should go with the downloadables. Obviously, no one would agree on what guidelines to use, and there would be a lot of complaining later about games that should count as one thing or another, but don't specifically meet the guidelines. I just think that would end up being more trouble than it's worth.

I think if we were going to count downloadable games, we'd need to count them seperately from retail games, so we wouldn't have Comet Crash being a match for Gears 2, or Geometry Wars 2 trumping Uncharted.

The problem with this is that downloadable PC games can have as much content as a retail game. So if we're going to have downloadables count, we need to decide on some guidelines that clarify the difference between a downloadable game that should be counted with the retail games, and one that should go with the downloadables. Obviously, no one would agree on what guidelines to use, and there would be a lot of complaining later about games that should count as one thing or another, but don't specifically meet the guidelines. I just think that would end up being more trouble than it's worth.

Cherokee_Jack

I agree with you, and I also ask, what about that console (forgot it's name) that's coming out that only has downloadable games? If it gets AAA AA scores, does that mean it'll never have them?

I agree with you, and I also ask, what about that console (forgot it's name) that's coming out that only has downloadable games? If it gets AAA AA scores, does that mean it'll never have them?

magiciandude

I think if we were going to count downloadable games, we'd need to count them seperately from retail games, so we wouldn't have Comet Crash being a match for Gears 2, or Geometry Wars 2 trumping Uncharted.

The problem with this is that downloadable PC games can have as much content as a retail game. So if we're going to have downloadables count, we need to decide on some guidelines that clarify the difference between a downloadable game that should be counted with the retail games, and one that should go with the downloadables. Obviously, no one would agree on what guidelines to use, and there would be a lot of complaining later about games that should count as one thing or another, but don't specifically meet the guidelines. I just think that would end up being more trouble than it's worth.

Downloadable games have never counted. If they did, the PC would be even more unstoppable.

Well in my opinion SSF2T HD Remix is a lot better than SF 4. So I agree with TC. A lot of people here have made some valid points of why they should count. And I think games with downloadable expansions don't get the same respect as retail released expansions either.

I'm with TC on this.

Downloadable games have never counted. If they did, the PC would be even more unstoppable.

nintendofreak_2

Due to piracy, I think downloadable services like steam are the future for PC anyway.

With all the silly DRM, I don't see the point in physical copies anymore.

Caring so much about something so trivial is pretty silly.