Poll: Wiiophobia?

[Evil Tim]

69 is greater than 50, meaning that most people thought that it was decent.

Yeah, it's not like most games publications rate on a scale where everything below a seven is terrible. Wait, that's exactly what they do. 69 is the same score the godawful recent Turok [http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/turok] has, and I doubt you'll find anyone claiming that was "decent." If you claim anything above 50 is "decent" you're also saying Blacksite was regarded as decent [Metacritic score of 62%] which rather flies in the face of the accepted version of reality.

 

[GonzoGamer]

For example, I lent one of my friends my copy of No More Heros, and he returned it in a few days saying it sucked. That could of just been a matter of personal taste rather then hardware bias, but now this same friend is talking about how exited he is for the No More Heros remake coming to the Xbox 360 in the future. A game that looks close to identical to the origional, doesn't have the motion controls, and will probably cost 3 times as much. I've also had friends ***** about how all the wii games are for kids when I'm playing Madworld in the same room, refuse to by Resident Evil 4 on Wii while owning Resident Evil 5 on Xbox, and complaining about how the Wii's friend codes suck when they don't actually own any games that support online at all. I'm not trying to start a verus thread, saying the Wii is the best console, or saying that the Wii doesn't deserve at least some of its critisism, but does anyone else feel like there might be some kind of stigma attatched to the Wii that goes beyond just not liking minigames, or is it just me thinking this?

Your friend is right about one thing: No More Heroes definitely sucked but tell him the remake is the same thing and it's going to suck just as much: actually more since it probably wont even look interesting any more. At least the original had an interesting style.

That said, I kind of like the wii. Sure most of the mature games aren't that great but I liked the Godfather game, the only version of RE4 I can tolerate is on the wii, and Bully was cool too. They need more cool franchises from last generation like Burnout & GTA; And they need to start another new franchise of their own, specifically for the wii.

And for the record, some of those family friendly games on the wii are fun. I dig the boom blocks.

 

[RexoftheFord]

Alright, so the main reason I see people complaining about the Wii and saying it deserves the hate that comes to it is the library of games. But for every Modern Warfare and Dragon Age that comes out for the Xbox, there are about 50 games that are just as shitty as the third party games for the Wii. All consoles tend to suffer this issue, so the whole hatred of the Wii for this reason is pretty irrational.

Not saying the Wii doesn't have its weaknesses though.

That's pretty backwards reasoning from yourself right there. The number of bad games either Wii, 360 or PS3 has is pretty irrelevant. It's a question of have many good and great games each console has, not the ratio of bad:good games.

I don't care how many more bad games Wii does than PS3 or 360, what puts turns me away from the console is that the lack of good ones.

Then by your standards, the Wii still tops the charts. But it's not backwards. It's actually quite relevent to the discussion as it pertains to the reasons people have given for their hate of the Wii, but thanks anyway.

 

[TheHappyHobo]

A game that looks close to identical to the origional, doesn't have the motion controls, and will probably cost 3 times as much.

I don't like the Wii. But I did like No More Heroes.
And then they took away my sword and made me collect coconuts, which, as it turns out, is a lot harder than killing people (go figure).
The minigames were annoying, but the game itself was actually really cool and I agree that the motion controls certainly helped make it that way. And I liked the graphics simply because it was as if the developers knew the Wii was utter shit so they didn't even try to make it look good (something other developers could probably learn from.)
Really the only thing I disagree with is your comment about the cost. $59.99 is the approximate cost of a new 360 game. $49.99 is the approximate cost of a new Wii game (that I've noticed).
$59.99 != 3*49.99.
Yes, I'm looking too much into it, but even exaggerations should have SOME validity.

 

[teisjm]

Sure there is.

There's reasons to dislike the wii, but for many people, they only need one reason to hate it, cause other people does so. Yelling whatever the guy before you said is safe, and if what he said was "bad" it'll prolly make you bad-ass as well.

It's prolly the same when everyone who doesn't own an x-box whine about Halo and gears beeing overrated, or when pc players hate on consoles for not using M/KB for controlls.

People are whiny little bitches who'll gladly jump on the hate train cause they've got nothing better to do since they've already touched themselves 10 times earlier that day, get used to it. The anonymosity of the internet makes this even more noteable.

 

[Artina89]

My grandad has a nintendo wii and it never gets used. The reason he doesn't play the wii much is because he finds he enjoys it a lot more when he's playing the games as part of a group (usually consisting of myself, my brother and one of my cousins) which he doesn't get to do often. As a result, its in the corner of his front room, virtually unplayed. Its because of this that me and my bro opted for a PS3 instead, and also, neither myself, my brother or my dad want to be waving our arms around after uni/college/work, but none of us hate it, because in the spectrum of things to hate or dislike, hating a console is pretty stupid, and a waste of time.

 

[DrDeath3191]

69 is greater than 50, meaning that most people thought that it was decent.

Yeah, it's not like most games publications rate on a scale where everything below a seven is terrible. Wait, that's exactly what they do. 69 is the same score the godawful recent Turok [http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/turok] has, and I doubt you'll find anyone claiming that was "decent." If you claim anything above 50 is "decent" you're also saying Blacksite was regarded as decent [Metacritic score of 62%] which rather flies in the face of the accepted version of reality.

It isn't a rail-shooter. It's a normal FPS, and it actually was pretty well accepted by most review sites.

Ah right, hence the Metacritic score of 69% [http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/conduit?q=the%20conduit].

69 is greater than 50, meaning that most people thought that it was decent. Plus, many of those reviews on the bottom of the spectrum are absolutely ridiculous: failing to mention the control customization, for example.

Hah, where have you been living the past decade or two? 5 out of 10 is pretty much the lovest a game can get, and while 7 or even 8 is usually mediocre. Everyone knows this well already. It's been a subject of complain and jokes for a long time.

This is starting to reek of denial...

Fine points from both of you. I suppose that a 69 really isn't all that great a score, if you have a 70 being your absolute threshold. But there are a lot of critics who had very high praise for at least some aspects of the game, unlike Turok. So I still keep it up there in games I consider great on Wii. Plus, it's hella fun. *Plus, could someone explain to me how the C+ from 1Up translate to a 58, if we're going with 70-79 being 'average'?*

 

[Evil Tim]

*Plus, could someone explain to me how the C+ from 1Up translate to a 58, if we're going with 70-79 being 'average'?*

Metacritic translates non-numeric reviews as if they're actually using a hundred-point scale. So the C+ is taken as meaning 58% because it's just above the middle of 1Up's ranking scale. People have complained about this, and Metacritic have basically told them to use honest review scales or piss off.

 

[Woodsey]

Yes, and oddly enough I can't really blame the people that do hold something against it (myself included).

 

[Axeli]

Alright, so the main reason I see people complaining about the Wii and saying it deserves the hate that comes to it is the library of games. But for every Modern Warfare and Dragon Age that comes out for the Xbox, there are about 50 games that are just as shitty as the third party games for the Wii. All consoles tend to suffer this issue, so the whole hatred of the Wii for this reason is pretty irrational.

Not saying the Wii doesn't have its weaknesses though.

That's pretty backwards reasoning from yourself right there. The number of bad games either Wii, 360 or PS3 has is pretty irrelevant. It's a question of have many good and great games each console has, not the ratio of bad:good games.

I don't care how many more bad games Wii does than PS3 or 360, what puts turns me away from the console is that the lack of good ones.

Then by your standards, the Wii still tops the charts. But it's not backwards. It's actually quite relevent to the discussion as it pertains to the reasons people have given for their hate of the Wii, but thanks anyway.

Tops the charts, as in has most of the best games or sells most consoles? The latter is hardly a definition of quality.
The former... Well I don't think so, but hey, each to their own.

Anyhow, I only saw you use the argument that it matters how much bad games a console has regardless of the amount of good ones. If you can't stand behind the reasoning, then don't use the argument. "But they did it first!" stopped working as an excuse when you were five.

 

[RexoftheFord]

Alright, so the main reason I see people complaining about the Wii and saying it deserves the hate that comes to it is the library of games. But for every Modern Warfare and Dragon Age that comes out for the Xbox, there are about 50 games that are just as shitty as the third party games for the Wii. All consoles tend to suffer this issue, so the whole hatred of the Wii for this reason is pretty irrational.

Not saying the Wii doesn't have its weaknesses though.

That's pretty backwards reasoning from yourself right there. The number of bad games either Wii, 360 or PS3 has is pretty irrelevant. It's a question of have many good and great games each console has, not the ratio of bad:good games.

I don't care how many more bad games Wii does than PS3 or 360, what puts turns me away from the console is that the lack of good ones.

Then by your standards, the Wii still tops the charts. But it's not backwards. It's actually quite relevent to the discussion as it pertains to the reasons people have given for their hate of the Wii, but thanks anyway.

Tops the charts, as in has most of the best games or sells most consoles? The latter is hardly a definition of quality.
The former... Well I don't think so, but hey, each to their own.

Anyhow, I only saw you use the argument that it matters how much bad games a console has regardless of the amount of good ones. If you can't stand behind the reasoning, then don't use the argument. "But they did it first!" stopped working as an excuse when you were five.

I think you misread the point of the argument. The point was that using the whole "bad games are released for the Wii" argument is irrational when using it to justify hating the console. Again, I did mention that ALL consoles have the problem of releasing bad games. So you should be hating all consoles if you argued by that reason. That was my point. Go back and reread it if you need to.

 

[Trotgar]

I like the Wii, it has potential, though it doesn't have that many good games at the moment.

 

[sephiroth1991]

People hate the wii. I thought that was just a myth.

OT: I guess some hate it for selling really well, but it dosn't have any real good games on it.

 

[Georgeman]

It's real. It exists. Many people want to make it disappear. Case in point: Michael "KingofIdiots" Pachter constantly parrots that a WiiHD is around the corner while everyone Nintendo executive has constantly been saying "NO". But he insists.

You should expect this behavior from many PS3/Xbox360 owners too. Since the Wii was released, everyone has been attacking it because it is the only profitable console out of the three.

Both gaming industry and gamers hate the Wii. You know, just like the "cough" NES "cough". You should do well to keep that in mind.

 

[Axeli]

Alright, so the main reason I see people complaining about the Wii and saying it deserves the hate that comes to it is the library of games. But for every Modern Warfare and Dragon Age that comes out for the Xbox, there are about 50 games that are just as shitty as the third party games for the Wii. All consoles tend to suffer this issue, so the whole hatred of the Wii for this reason is pretty irrational.

Not saying the Wii doesn't have its weaknesses though.

That's pretty backwards reasoning from yourself right there. The number of bad games either Wii, 360 or PS3 has is pretty irrelevant. It's a question of have many good and great games each console has, not the ratio of bad:good games.

I don't care how many more bad games Wii does than PS3 or 360, what puts turns me away from the console is that the lack of good ones.

Then by your standards, the Wii still tops the charts. But it's not backwards. It's actually quite relevent to the discussion as it pertains to the reasons people have given for their hate of the Wii, but thanks anyway.

Tops the charts, as in has most of the best games or sells most consoles? The latter is hardly a definition of quality.
The former... Well I don't think so, but hey, each to their own.

Anyhow, I only saw you use the argument that it matters how much bad games a console has regardless of the amount of good ones. If you can't stand behind the reasoning, then don't use the argument. "But they did it first!" stopped working as an excuse when you were five.

I think you misread the point of the argument. The point was that using the whole "bad games are released for the Wii" argument is irrational when using it to justify hating the console. Again, I did mention that ALL consoles have the problem of releasing bad games. So you should be hating all consoles if you argued by that reason. That was my point. Go back and reread it if you need to.

OK, that makes sense. It just seems to me that when someone complains about Wii having too many bad games, they do infact mean that it has only bad games without the redeeming quality ones. I mean, it's a pretty obvious implication, isn't it? I doubt people literally mean that it's the bad games that make everything else about Wii suck (well, any more of the people than the usual internet idiot ratio warrants).

 

[DrDeath3191]

*Plus, could someone explain to me how the C+ from 1Up translate to a 58, if we're going with 70-79 being 'average'?*

Metacritic translates non-numeric reviews as if they're actually using a hundred-point scale. So the C+ is taken as meaning 58% because it's just above the middle of 1Up's ranking scale. People have complained about this, and Metacritic have basically told them to use honest review scales or piss off.

A C+ says to me that a game is 'okay, but not spectacular'. That would seem to merit a 70-79. But I suppose that this way of looking at the value is okay as well. Thanks for alleviating the confusion.

 

[Mr Wednesday]

Well, to be fair, I can't think of a single game on the Wii that I actually want to play, barring in house Nintendo games like Mario Galaxy, and even then, I'm not exactly slavering for them.

 

[DjinnFor]

I haven't played the GCN version, so you could be right.
A game in the same series using some of the same elements while otherwise being completely different?! Say it isn't so!
It's point and shoot, it doesn't get any simpler than that. If you're talking about throwing grenades and such, use the nunchuk: it improves the experience greatly.
It isn't a rail-shooter. It's a normal FPS, and it actually was pretty well accepted by most review sites.

And here's the problem with the third-party support on Wii: Nobody knows that these games exist. Despite all of them being critically lauded, the companies keep silent about their launches. There aren't any TV ads, hardly any magazine articles, and the only ad I saw for Extraction was a sidebar on IGN. Game companies: Advertise your Wii titles, otherwise people won't know how great they really are!

I must have mistaken The Conduit for something else then. Upon further research, however, it still had mixed reviews because it tried to hard to look good (but still didn't look as good as some of the worse PS3 and 360 games) without having any sort of substance to it. After seeing a screenshot I recognized it as belonging to my friend, and my first few impressions were largely the same. And despite how well it may have been received, after giving various major review sites like IGN a look-over I couldn't help but notice the subtle notions of "It's great... for a Wii game".

Dead Space: Extraction is a sub-par rip-off, plain and simple. I've played it and it's like playing Dead Space only with worse controls (as usual!) and less content and substance.

And I notice I can't spell boring at 6:00am. Nice. In any case, House of the Dead: Origins, while having 'simple' controls, was still, like I said, unintuitive as it forced you to jump through hoops to achieve simple commands. And no, I'm not purchasing fifty peripherals just to get the right functionality I should have had to begin with (even thought I got mine second-hand without a nunchaku, that still doesn't excuse the other peripherals like the gun and whatnot, or that damn Wii-Motion-Plus crap; you know, the peripheral that makes the Wii work like it was supposed to in the beginning?).

 

[Carnagath]

Well, it's a piece of junk, and a massively overpriced one for no reason other than Nintendo's greed. I have no problem with kids buying it, but when it comes to the "hip, super cool casual gamer sex magnet" and "housewife" demographic, it makes my blood boil. It also vexes me to look at Wii game shelves at stores and see that half the shit they have released are sequels of things that started, like, half a CENTURY ago and the other half are not even games. It all just reeks of corporate staleness trying to survive via ginormous "cool" marketing and bullshit gimmicky motherfuckery, and the fact that they are not just "surviving" but actually owning reminds me of the simple truth that people are morons.

 

[Aura Guardian]

The following post is an opinion. Thanks.

FF:CC -> Just as terrible as the gamecube version; just as bad a slap in the face. Umm no. It's not even remotely close to the Gamecube version. The WiiWare versions are a slap in the face due to them being a micromanagement rpg
DS:E -> Essentially a sub-par rip-off of Dead Space Re-read what DrDeath said
HotD:O -> Fairly simplistic and pooring with unintuitive controls (like the entire system) Pointing and pressing B. That must be hard. You're just bad at a very simple game and that's just sad and laughable.
The Conduit -> Widely lauded as a pathetic rail shooter It's an FPS. You're just blind and "trying to be cool" by hating the Wii aren't you?
SH:SM -> Considering it's a silent hill game, it might be worth looking into, but I can't say I've heard much good (or bad, admittedly) about it It's very good

Even owning a Wii, I've never heard of any of those other games, which leads me to believe they probably either suck or didn't receive any good media attention because nobody cared enough about them. In regards to the 2010 lineup, likewise. Actually, on second thought, I did hear about Red Steel 2, and if it is at all comparable to it's predecessor, it's not going to be much more than generic trash either.

Admittedly, I'm a hard-to-please gamer here (the majority of PS3/Xbox games by far are garbage as well) so this may just be me but the Wii stands out as the only console to spew out absolutely nothing worthwhile in it's entire life. Including Brawl, Mario Galaxy, et cetera not mentioned here.

Your grade-D.