the best games for the wii are the old snes and n64 games

[QUOTE="KingOfTaco"]So one smaller, shallower, shorter game beats many bigger ones? Where's the logic in that? It isn't just graphics, it's AI, game size, depth, story, all that stuff.BuryMe

But technology doesn't dictate how good a game is. It isn't suddenly bad because it's on an older system, and it isn't suddenly good because it's on a strong system. Zelda has a great story, and the gameplay is great. It's a great game, even if it is old

I know technology doesn't dictate quality, but if Game X is bested in almost every area by Game Y, what makes Game X better? I mean old games, if given the right reason, can be superior. I like Doom still because it packs loads of enemies onscreen at all times. I like Super Mario Brothers 3 because it has loads of secrets integrated in wonderful level design. But suppose someone said SMB > SMB3. Wouldn't you wonder why, considering SMB3 is longer, more challenging, has more powerups, better level design, better looking, etc? And my main argument was that the guy said 1 game > an entire library.

If I went by YOUR scores, then yes. However, if I gave one game 10, and the rest 4-5's, I'd see the 10 as being amuch more worthwhile cause. QUALITY, not QUANTITY.ranger_waha

Quality over quantity goes without saying. But still, by your logic one 10 is better than fifteen 9.9's. If by Gamespot's scores I could choose one AAAA game or the entire library of games they gave 9.9's to, I'd take the 9.9's in a heartbeat.

and thats sad

wii owners will end up using the wii as a retro system to get thier gaming satisfaction

Zam_basic

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="KingOfTaco"]So one smaller, shallower, shorter game beats many bigger ones? Where's the logic in that? It isn't just graphics, it's AI, game size, depth, story, all that stuff.KingOfTaco

But technology doesn't dictate how good a game is. It isn't suddenly bad because it's on an older system, and it isn't suddenly good because it's on a strong system. Zelda has a great story, and the gameplay is great. It's a great game, even if it is old

I know technology doesn't dictate quality, but if Game X is bested in almost every area by Game Y, what makes Game X better? I mean old games, if given the right reason, can be superior. I like Doom still because it packs loads of enemies onscreen at all times. I like Super Mario Brothers 3 because it has loads of secrets integrated in wonderful level design. But suppose someone said SMB > SMB3. Wouldn't you wonder why, considering SMB3 is longer, more challenging, has more powerups, better level design, better looking, etc? And my main argument was that the guy said 1 game > an entire library.

[QUOTE="KingOfTaco"][QUOTE="DrPepper1998"]Wait, are there any PSP games that aren't sequels?DrPepper1998

Lumines, Loco Roco? The PSP's a haven for sequels but there are games that aren't.

p.s. If any PSP fanboy calls the DS kiddy im going to stick a big fat LOCO ROCO in their face.

I'm not even sure if there are any PSP fanboys left. 'Sides the obligatory fakeboy here and there, though I could be wrong.

[QUOTE="KingOfTaco"][QUOTE="ranger_waha"][QUOTE="KingOfTaco"][QUOTE="ranger_waha"][QUOTE="KingOfTaco"]

[QUOTE="ranger_waha"]Some people aren't looking for technical superiority. There are people on GS who'd say the fiorst Metroid Prime game for nes >>>all other libraries. If a game is good, it's good. Time doesn't chip away at that, unless your simply facetious. Besides, the only thing on this board is opinion. If I have to put IMO before every post, there's a problem here.ranger_waha

I love it when people say something completely questionable, and then proclaim "it's my opinion". That has to be by far the biggest copout I've ever seen.

So, then, how does OoT beat the entire X360 library?

The ENTIRE library? So if I gave a game a 10, and then 15 games 9.9's, am I supposed to believe that the 10 game is better than 15 9.9's put together? By your logic I'm supposed to.

[QUOTE="KingOfTaco"][QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="KingOfTaco"]So one smaller, shallower, shorter game beats many bigger ones? Where's the logic in that? It isn't just graphics, it's AI, game size, depth, story, all that stuff.DrPepper1998

But technology doesn't dictate how good a game is. It isn't suddenly bad because it's on an older system, and it isn't suddenly good because it's on a strong system. Zelda has a great story, and the gameplay is great. It's a great game, even if it is old

I know technology doesn't dictate quality, but if Game X is bested in almost every area by Game Y, what makes Game X better? I mean old games, if given the right reason, can be superior. I like Doom still because it packs loads of enemies onscreen at all times. I like Super Mario Brothers 3 because it has loads of secrets integrated in wonderful level design. But suppose someone said SMB > SMB3. Wouldn't you wonder why, considering SMB3 is longer, more challenging, has more powerups, better level design, better looking, etc? And my main argument was that the guy said 1 game > an entire library.

[QUOTE="DrPepper1998"][QUOTE="KingOfTaco"][QUOTE="DrPepper1998"]Wait, are there any PSP games that aren't sequels?KingOfTaco

Lumines, Loco Roco? The PSP's a haven for sequels but there are games that aren't.

p.s. If any PSP fanboy calls the DS kiddy im going to stick a big fat LOCO ROCO in their face.

I'm not even sure if there are any PSP fanboys left. 'Sides the obligatory fakeboy here and there, though I could be wrong.

OPINIONS!!!!!!!! OPINIONS!!!!!!!!!! VIDEO GAMES ARE BASED ON OPINIONS!!!!!!! I COULD SAY THAT HAPPY FEET WAS THE BEST GAME EVER AND guess what? you couldnt form a strong argument against me because it wouldnt make me change my mind, there arent facts, just opinions!DrPepper1998

"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others."

Someone said that. Not sure who, though.