When peope question the lack of quality third party games, Nintendo fan's are quick to say: "Lazy Developers", but many do not ask themselves the question: What if developers continue to be lazy? See the problem with the Wii is not that it's "gimicky" controls and "crappy" graphics bottleneck the creativity of the developers, it is that it is too hard to develop for, but not in the technical sense.

Over the course of game development games were about. Graphics, Gameplay, and Fun. To make an original game all one had to do was polish the graphics, introduce new gameplay elements, and make it all fun to play. With the Wii the controls for the various genres have not be set in stone yet so developers have to worry about making the controls synergize with all the other elements. Suddenly it becomes, Graphics, Gameplay, Fun, and Controls, and this to much for developers to handle. We start getting games like Madden Wii which revitalize the fun with interesting controls but fails to implement new gameplay and have horrible graphix. Or, we have Red Steel which has graphics and some new gameplay elements(swordfights) but fail in the fun and control area.

At this point many point out the DS and it's lack of proper use of the stylus and how the Wii will just follow in its footsteps. But what they fail to realize is that the stylus and touch screen can borrow it's controls from the PC, for what is a touch screen but just a small mousepad. Most breakthroughs for console gaming controls can borrow its basic control mechanisms from something else thats already been done, ie. analog stick --> joystick , rumble --> force feedback. There is nothing the Wii can borrow its control mechnisms from, can you name anything that has two handed tilting and pointing functions? So it is reasonable to assume that control finalization for the Wii is going to take a long time.

I have a Wii and hope that nintendo is able to show everyone how the controls for the Wii will work so developers have something less to worry about. Nintendo has done everything they can too help the Wii, but unless the controls improve people will realize that the Wii amounts to nothing more than Mini-Games and Motions for button presses.

riflecow

seriously, im tired of talking about sales. thats the only thing which matters to you sheep now?

last gen it was a different story :roll:

shadow_lord_11

I'm going to go with the PSP.shungokustasu

I have yet to understand why all the hype about this game, why everyone praises it and why every site reviewed this game AAA, specially Gamespot.

What does the game offer that other shooters don't? In fact, I believe if offers LESS than many others out there. Let's take a look at the single-player mode. The average gamer can beat the game in 8... 8 HOURS. You get better at the game and you might as well beat it in under 7. Is this even acceptable by today's standards? What game offers a one player experience worth so little time nowadays? I can take Ratchet & Clank 3 as a comparison, the campaign is OVER 20 hours, and the game is last-gen. One person can just rent the game for 5 days and beat it in all difficulties. For those without Xbox Live, you can see everything in a day. It's seriously dissapointing, and I can't understand why almost no reviews took this into account when scoring the game.

Then there's multiplayer. What's so special about it? You have ONLY 3 game modes, being all team-based. There's no variety whatsoever. Every mode feels the same: kill all the guys in the other team. I don't even look at what type o game I'm gonna play because I know I just need to headshot my opponents. It's all the same, over and over again. There isn't even free-for-all. The maps are ordinary, and get boring fast because the action is based around one or two places, and there's no tactics involved because you only need to rush to the center of the map and start killing. And online the whole gameplay is ruined because the point of the game (cover, come out and shoot, cover again, etc) does not exist. While the development team created this game around covers and stuff, the maps they have provided online ruin this and provide a gun and run (is this the correct term?) gameplay, which is too far from what the game intended. Let's check R&C3 again. You have 7 or 8 modes, team based and free-for-all, with a lot of variety and strategy involved, because the maps provide multiple ways to get to a point and because there are multiple spots worth fighting for. Not to mention there are more maps than in Gears.

This game is average at best, there aren't enough things that stand out to make this game a killer app, in fact many of those things are well under what standard shooters provide, in both this and previous gen. The graphics are great, the audio is good, but that aloneshould not warrant this game a AAA. Don't get me wrong, I am enjoying it so far, but for me this is only a good game, not great, not superb and not the best out there.

bakalhau90