Nintendo games are too archaic for this gen

The games for the Wii have been very underwhelming for me compared to the high quality titles I've played on the 360. I really liked Nintendo when they didn't forget to upgrade their console's hardware to provide for technically advanced games. I'd say the most advanced game on the Wii is probably RE4 or Mario Galaxy 2 I guess.. but Mario games don't do it for me as they have no story. I believe Nintendo really needed Rare this gen since Rare can produce high quality games that suit me.

I mean look at this game from 2002.

That game looks better than half of the Nintendo Wii games, and it was made by Rare. Rare has always been able to produce the most technically advanced games until they went into their decline.

I recently played the Dead Space 2 demo, and I really liked it's atmosphere, and it's actually the first game to ever make me feel worried of death. The game looks well made, and it also reminded me of Metroid. So after I beat the DS2 demo I went to play Metroid Prime 3 to see if I can get into it's atmosphere and story,but I soon became bored of it and it's repetative music, and boring combat. I can shoot the enemies but the way they die is so boring, they even glow RED when you hit them! How cheap is that? Also if you touch them by bumping into them you get hurt. Isn't that a little too archaic? Dead Space is definately a better scifi shooter/explorer than Metroid in my eyes, and no Nintendo Wii game can make me feel immersed in it's story like 360 games do.

The Wii failed me, and I think the Gamecube was a better console for it's time.

ITT: Gameplay means nothing. Graphics mean everything. And a game w/out a story is a game of little interest.

ITT: Gameplay means nothing. Graphics mean everything. And a game w/out a story is a game of little interest.

sandbox3d

What does ITT mean?

Oh look, another wii graphics thread.

And btw, Donkey kong country returns, Monster hunter tri, and Super mario galaxy 2 Look "ALOT" better star fox adventures graphicly.

EDIT: and RARE can still produce top of the line graphics in games as the always have. *points to Banjo kazooie nuts and bolts as one of the 360's best*

It's the games where RARE has fell off a cliff.

And I think FPS are generic for this gen, see?

Your trying to look at power, when what matters is quality which 1st party still have. Btw alot of Wii games look better than that, and Rare hasn't made a good game in ages even if it has good graphics.

Oh look, another wii graphics thread.

And btw, Donkey kong country returns, Monster hunter tri, and Super mario galaxy 2 Look "ALOT" better star fox adventures in graphicly.

theuncharted34

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

Oh look, another wii graphics thread.

And btw, Donkey kong country returns, Monster hunter tri, and Super mario galaxy 2 Look "ALOT" better star fox adventures graphicly.

millerlight89

I suppose he did :P

And it took you this long to realize this?

ITT: Gameplay means nothing. Graphics mean everything. And a game w/out a story is a game of little interest.

sandbox3d

[QUOTE="sandbox3d"]

ITT: Gameplay means nothing. Graphics mean everything. And a game w/out a story is a game of little interest.

Calvin079

I know... my god, trust me I KNOW!

I was just summing up the OP.

[QUOTE="Calvin079"]

[QUOTE="sandbox3d"]

ITT: Gameplay means nothing. Graphics mean everything. And a game w/out a story is a game of little interest.

sandbox3d

I know... my god, trust me I KNOW!

I was just summing up the OP.

I don't understand, are you summing up what I said?That's not what I said at all.

ITT = "I think that"?

ITT in a forum setting usually means "In this topic."

And sorry, but that is the impression I got from your title and post.

that starfox? screen looks horrible..and rare sucks thats why nintendo probably let them go.campzor

It may be crappy now, but not compared to this 2008 Wii game, which is typical of third party Wii games.

TC, have you even beaten a wii game yet?

you will see the experience is different but both leave you feeling just as good.

[QUOTE="campzor"]that starfox? screen looks horrible..and rare sucks thats why nintendo probably let them go.RECON64bit

It may be crappy now, but not compared to this 2008 Wii game, which is typical of third party Wii games.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

Oh look, another wii graphics thread.

And btw, Donkey kong country returns, Monster hunter tri, and Super mario galaxy 2 Look "ALOT" better star fox adventures in graphicly.

millerlight89

Which is silly, since it's comparing the graphics of a top quality game against an entire library of games. Of course it's going to beat a lot of them, as there's many different levels of quality in the latter.

Comparing it to the Wii's top offerings you're likely to have a much, much shorter list of games.

Retro Studios> Rare

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

[QUOTE="campzor"]that starfox? screen looks horrible..and rare sucks thats why nintendo probably let them go.Calvin079

It may be crappy now, but not compared to this 2008 Wii game, which is typical of third party Wii games.

Oh come one, just look at the player model, and notice the water compared to SFA water. I mean really.

And I have beaten plenty wii games, and felt unsatisfied

Retro Studios> Rare

p3anut

The games for the Wii have been very underwhelming for me compared to the high quality titles I've played on the 360. I really liked Nintendo when they didn't forget to upgrade their console's hardware to provide for technically advanced games. I'd say the most advanced game on the Wii is probably RE4 or Mario Galaxy 2 I guess.. but Mario games don't do it for me as they have no story. I believe Nintendo really needed Rare this gen since Rare can produce high quality games that suit me.

RECON64bit

Who plays Mario platformers for a story?

I mean look at this game from 2002.

That game looks better than half of the Nintendo Wii games, and it was made by Rare. Rare has always been able to produce the most technically advanced games until they went into their decline.

RECON64bit

Blame those other developers for making those games graphics look worse than SFA. They don't even try to push the Wii to it's limits.

I recently played the Dead Space 2 demo, and I really liked it's atmosphere, and it's actually the first game to ever make me feel worried of death. The game looks well made, and it also reminded me of Metroid. So after I beat the DS2 demo I went to play Metroid Prime 3 to see if I can get into it's atmosphere and story,but I soon became bored of it and it's repetative music, and boring combat. I can shoot the enemies but the way they die is so boring, they even glow RED when you hit them! How cheap is that? Also if you touch them by bumping into them you get hurt. Isn't that a little too archaic? Dead Space is definately a better scifi shooter/explorer than Metroid in my eyes, and no Nintendo Wii game can make me feel immersed in it's story like 360 games do.

The Wii failed me, and I think the Gamecube was a better console for it's time.

RECON64bit

[QUOTE="Calvin079"]

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

It may be crappy now, but not compared to this 2008 Wii game, which is typical of third party Wii games.

RECON64bit

Oh come one, just look at the player model, and notice the water compared to SFA water. I mean really.

And I have beaten plenty wii games, and felt unsatisfied

Funny, and yet I've found the games on the Wii to be far more enjoyable than the cliche story driven mainstream titles on the other platforms. Why people need a story to push them play a video game is one of those arguments that I can't comprehend.

Funny, and yet I've found the games on the Wii to be far more enjoyable than the cliche story driven mainstream titles on the other platforms. Why people need a story to push them play a video game is one of those arguments that I can't comprehend.

Renegade_Fury

I believe Nintendo really needed Rare this gen since Rare can produce high quality games that suit me.

RECON64bit

you go enjoy kinect sports and kinectimals.

I'll be over here enjoying SMG2

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

I believe Nintendo really needed Rare this gen since Rare can produce high quality games that suit me.

Shinobishyguy

you go enjoy kinect sports and kinectimals.

I'll be over here enjoying SMG2

Sorry, but I actually have a choice to play quality titles albeit they aren't exclusives they are still games I can play while the Wii has very little games that are worth playing. I have a Wii that I got for smash bros. and even that game was a disappointment.

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

I believe Nintendo really needed Rare this gen since Rare can produce high quality games that suit me.

RECON64bit

you go enjoy kinect sports and kinectimals.

I'll be over here enjoying SMG2

Sorry, but I actually have a choice to play quality titles albeit they aren't exclusives they are still games I can play while the Wii has very little games that are worth playing. I have a Wii that I got for smash bros. and even that game was a disappointment.

Is SMG not worth playing?

ITT = "I think that"?

RECON64bit

On topic, if you don't like the games on Wii, don't play 'em. Simple.

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

Who plays Mario platformers for a story?

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

I mean look at this game from 2002.

That game looks better than half of the Nintendo Wii games, and it was made by Rare. Rare has always been able to produce the most technically advanced games until they went into their decline.

nintendoboy16

Blame those other developers for making those games graphics look worse than SFA. They don't even try to push the Wii to it's limits.

I recently played the Dead Space 2 demo, and I really liked it's atmosphere, and it's actually the first game to ever make me feel worried of death. The game looks well made, and it also reminded me of Metroid. So after I beat the DS2 demo I went to play Metroid Prime 3 to see if I can get into it's atmosphere and story,but I soon became bored of it and it's repetative music, and boring combat. I can shoot the enemies but the way they die is so boring, they even glow RED when you hit them! How cheap is that? Also if you touch them by bumping into them you get hurt. Isn't that a little too archaic? Dead Space is definately a better scifi shooter/explorer than Metroid in my eyes, and no Nintendo Wii game can make me feel immersed in it's story like 360 games do.

The Wii failed me, and I think the Gamecube was a better console for it's time.

RECON64bit

Ok, so Mario games are not known for their story, I was just saying that's the reasonwhy I don't like them.

Metroid Prime is definately aFPS, it's FPS just how half life and Bioshock are. Metroid and Dead Space is a natural comparison as they deal with the same genre and both have that isolationist atmosphere. Dead Space atmoshpere makes the isolation more real, while the isolation in Metroid is boring to me. I played all Metroid Prime games and really tried to like them, I forced myself through them and beat them.

I think the only way for Metroid's dead worlds, to be interesting is through a powerful console. I mean, imagine Metroid on the 360/PS3? It'd be amuch more engrossing experience. Hopefully the next Nintendo system will have the hardware to produce a much better Metroid game.

If you don't like games if they have no story, then you must not have played a lot of games this gen. :Ptagyhag

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]If you don't like games if they have no story, then you must not have played a lot of games this gen. :Pantifanboyftw

Edit: And actually SMG2 DOES have a story then.

roitflol at graphics mean everything you live under a rock .,

gameplay is what matters the most that and replay value and hardly ne 360 game has it ,

ive got at least 3 uhaul truck loads of dull games on my 360 i dont know what to do with em lets see pd0 -all flash no substance

kameo same thing ,

halo 3-looks like halo 2 just with hsineir graphics didnt see much gameplay difference

dark sector theres a reason it was 6 bucks , , -when i got it, cause its a generic gears of war lol

then theres haze -ps3 , among other fpses /games ive playede which got bored of ten minutes into it

and wii has a variety let me tell you you wont be playing 20 fpses each time you flick a game lol ,

OP: Dude, if you're gonna be logical talk about WII GAMES and not GameCube ports!

Then call me old fashioned, because I love most of the Wii's first party offerings.

the wii games are awesome idk what you are talking bout honestly. power does not bother me if im having fun

Well, I though this was another senseless Nintendo bashing thread from some Sony fanboy, but I guess I'm wrong this time :P

To answer your question: GameCube already needed Rare. But it's questionable if even Rare could save the Cube which was deemed "kiddy" by the PS2 and Xbox fanboys.

However, Rare is now a 3rd rate dev, so maybe they are even better off without them (looks like Retro will slowly take the role of Rare).

Wii took a direction in that did not focus on hardware and instead being affordable. I will agree they are however archaic in terms Story, Graphics and Online, which interestingly enough, are the 3 things I care the least about. Considering the games I am playing.

In 90% of all cases, I cant stand stories in video games and how a lot of games seem to force me to care about what is going on. And in a lot of games I play I wish they could just get have no story at all, as someone said, no story is better than a CoD quality story. And no, even Bioware's stories arent that good in my opinion, and their stories are considered really good... for video game standards anyway. *puts up flameshield*

Graphics are nice and can help the atmosphere, AI is a bit on the weak side on Wii games and I hope they get improved next gen, Scale is something I want to improve not only for the Wii, but also the 360 and PS3. Online is something I almost never use, almost of my multiplayer is split screen and LAN.

Edit: There are good stories however, but they are few and far between and mostly in the adventure genre.

By "archaic" Im going to say you mean...Sells millions of copies daily..People can bash NIN all they want..Have your laughs..BUT when this gen ends...IF all camps where being 100% truthful...NIN would be million(S) ahead of both Sony and MS...So "archaic" or not, NIN has done something right.

Ah well, you'll grow out of this mindset eventually... the way you present yourself, you seem to be an adolescent. Soon you'll get in touch with what games you really like and find you probably won't agree with you current self 5-10 years from now.

I know that's what happened to me over the past 10 years. I've started to enjoy both storyless games like SMG2 for their perfected gameplay, and story-driven games like Arkham Asylum for their dark atmosphere and extremely well-written stories and high levels of quality characterization.

Ironically, for a game story and characters to be truly outstanding, the developers have to rely on a comic continuum to make them truly stand out next to all the one-dimensional crap we've been getting for most of gaming history (*glares at Mass Effect*).

The Wii to me is really like an old Mac. Yeah your Mom and little kids might get a kick out of it for awhile, but theres nothing for the adverage gamer unless your looking for that nostalgia feeling. The only diffrence is thoes old Mac games don;'t cost 60$