Wii versus PS2
- Thread starter Liminal Dusk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I find most Wii games to be dry and devoid of any in depth content... Almost like game companies realized they could make money with low budget, short, and overall mediocre games simply because of the Wii's massive userbase.
Seriously, how many 'big budget' (Orange Box, CoD 4, Fallout 3 for example) games for the Wii can you count? With Nintendo milking the living s*** out of their 'old favourites' and the flood of sub sub crap third party games, there are almost no Wii games worth buying. Even the Wii's much touted motion sensing controls are lacking, and either unused or incredibly annoying/unnecessary in most games.
I find it much better to shop for new games for my Wii in the tiny Gamecube section of my local EB.
Seriously, how many 'big budget' (Orange Box, CoD 4, Fallout 3 for example) games for the Wii can you count? With Nintendo milking the living s*** out of their 'old favourites' and the flood of sub sub crap third party games, there are almost no Wii games worth buying. Even the Wii's much touted motion sensing controls are lacking, and either unused or incredibly annoying/unnecessary in most games.
I find it much better to shop for new games for my Wii in the tiny Gamecube section of my local EB.
On the PS3? Hmm, I don't know your style, but my favorite exclusives are currently MGS4, Ratchet and Clank, Disgaea 3, LittleBigPlanet, Resisance and Resistance 2. I don't think those are on the PC. Oh, and Folklore. Can't forget that.ChromeAlchemist said:
I really want to play another Fire Emblem for the Wii. That and Zelda've been my favorites thus far. Oh, and No More Heroes.
I still haven't even played the new fire emblem and I have the audacity to call myself an avid fan. I will be getting it soon though. Not to mention MadWorld, which looks awesome, and the conduit when they come out, and I can see some interesting stuff coming on the horizon very soon.Liminal Dusk said:
Also is drake's fortune any good? I would probably get it anyway because it is cheap, but besides it's technological merits is it a good game?
The PS2 has a huge library of AAA titles for pretty much any genre and taste, while the Wii has a deluge of pure shit games and stupid gimmicks, and once in a year or so the Wii gets a good title that keeps the gamers hanging on for dear hope. PS2 is easily better.
I want a Wii to play Umbrella chronicles.
There's that Rayman game for the Wii which is quite fun.
I prefer the original on the PS1 though...
There's that Rayman game for the Wii which is quite fun.
I prefer the original on the PS1 though...
I tried to be in the same boat as you for the longest time. I gave up and bought a PS3. Best decision of my life. PS2 is still a good system, but the PS3 is "a big dependable black monster. Slow, but lovingly bringing in your slippers every morning," and that's what I like about it.
I think the OP's point is valid. Most 3rd party development teams for the Wii are just old PS2 development teams who are (surpise) also developing a PS2 version of the title. Most of the engines and middleware used for the Wii is old PS2 tech as well.
I'm actually surprised that Sony hasn't countered with some affordable tech similar to the Wiimote in order to boost PS2 sales. But maybe they just don't know how to do peripherals right?
I'm actually surprised that Sony hasn't countered with some affordable tech similar to the Wiimote in order to boost PS2 sales. But maybe they just don't know how to do peripherals right?
The difference between the PS2 and the Wii is that I feel the PS2 targeted as many gamers as possible, with some non-gamers brought in on the side. On the other hand, I think the Wii targets a lot of non-gamers, but with a few traditional gamers brought in on the side.
I think that's a perfectly fine marketing strategy. When you're making money on hardware it's a brilliant way to go. For people like me, though, it's just not helpful. Someone above mentioned how games should go back to brains instead of brawns (visuals) as a focus, but I think that's exactly the opposite of what a lot of Wii games do. Sure, they're accessible to new gamers, but I don't think they carry the sort of complexity, difficulty, or thoughtful design I'd really like to see out of new games.
Technology is fundamentally useful in making a better game, as well. That the Wii doesn't have as much console power as the 360 or PS3 wouldn't be so disappointing if I felt they were genuinely making better games, but it seems to me developers have just used this as an excuse to reduce production costs overall. Which, really, is probably fine for people that don't have a history of gaming, or prefer simpler games, but it just doesn't give me what I want at all.
To date, the only game that makes me want a Wii is Shikigami no Shiro III, which actually has a 360 version in Japan, but only was released in the US on Wii. That game would be fantastic to own. The other stuff - the Marios, Zeldas, even Metroid Prime - just doesn't hold the appeal that their old 2D versions did. I'm not sure whether I've changed or they have, but, given my love for Mega Man 9 recently, I'm more inclined to blame the designers. So I really don't think the Wii is helping people get back to basics, I think it's just shifting to an entirely new market.
I think that's a perfectly fine marketing strategy. When you're making money on hardware it's a brilliant way to go. For people like me, though, it's just not helpful. Someone above mentioned how games should go back to brains instead of brawns (visuals) as a focus, but I think that's exactly the opposite of what a lot of Wii games do. Sure, they're accessible to new gamers, but I don't think they carry the sort of complexity, difficulty, or thoughtful design I'd really like to see out of new games.
Technology is fundamentally useful in making a better game, as well. That the Wii doesn't have as much console power as the 360 or PS3 wouldn't be so disappointing if I felt they were genuinely making better games, but it seems to me developers have just used this as an excuse to reduce production costs overall. Which, really, is probably fine for people that don't have a history of gaming, or prefer simpler games, but it just doesn't give me what I want at all.
To date, the only game that makes me want a Wii is Shikigami no Shiro III, which actually has a 360 version in Japan, but only was released in the US on Wii. That game would be fantastic to own. The other stuff - the Marios, Zeldas, even Metroid Prime - just doesn't hold the appeal that their old 2D versions did. I'm not sure whether I've changed or they have, but, given my love for Mega Man 9 recently, I'm more inclined to blame the designers. So I really don't think the Wii is helping people get back to basics, I think it's just shifting to an entirely new market.
With the library of games out right now, PS2 is easily better than the Wii, with a cheaper price for the console, and a wide array of games that can be found for less than $10.
All this crap about "Gameplay > Graphics" is the stupidest shit ever. The statement is obviously true, but what's wrong is to automatically assume every game with great visuals is has shallow and empty gameplay. The best looking games (Uncharted, MGS4, Gears, Resistance) are almost always complimented with great gameplay and value. Compare that to 3/4 of the Wii's game library of third-party shovelware that not only looks like shit, but plays poorly too. The Wii isn't entitled to the "Gameplay > Graphics" argument until it provides more games with indepth gameplay to support it.
Think of it like this:
The high poly graphics of the PS3/360 appeal to hardcore gamers in the same way the cutesy/cartoony graphics in most Wii games appeal to casual and non-gamers. So, how is the Wii any less shallow? (assuming there's even an accusation of shallow gameplay - I'm not suggesting that PS3/360 games are lacking depth)
All this crap about "Gameplay > Graphics" is the stupidest shit ever. The statement is obviously true, but what's wrong is to automatically assume every game with great visuals is has shallow and empty gameplay. The best looking games (Uncharted, MGS4, Gears, Resistance) are almost always complimented with great gameplay and value. Compare that to 3/4 of the Wii's game library of third-party shovelware that not only looks like shit, but plays poorly too. The Wii isn't entitled to the "Gameplay > Graphics" argument until it provides more games with indepth gameplay to support it.
Think of it like this:
The high poly graphics of the PS3/360 appeal to hardcore gamers in the same way the cutesy/cartoony graphics in most Wii games appeal to casual and non-gamers. So, how is the Wii any less shallow? (assuming there's even an accusation of shallow gameplay - I'm not suggesting that PS3/360 games are lacking depth)
The way I see it. Everyone needs to stop making Ps2 games. And focus more on the current generation. I mean come on how long has the damn thing been out? And do you see Nintendo and Microsoft making any new Gc or Xbox games? Sony needs to worry about the Ps3 which is not doing very well at all. The Nintendo Wii is selling more than the Ps3. And the Ps3 is supposed to be superrior. The Ps2 and Wii have about the same graphical capabillities anyways. So all in all. If you take away the motion controls. The two systems are about the same.
So far only Nintendo has really made anything good for there console and man what I would give to have Super Smash Brothers on Xbox Live. I wish Nintendo would do CRAPPY so I could play there games on other systems rather then play there systems.
Unfortunately I do not own a next-generation console. I've seen the games on the Wii and even played a few, but still have never felt compelled to hunt one down. My PS2 still resolutely sits on a nearby shelf, and while most of the titles I used to own have been hocked to my local GameStop to afford expansions for WoW, I really don't see an upgrade as being necessary. Classic titles are very reasonably priced, if I feel I need to own them again, and I can always sign up for GameFly if I just need to satisfy a fix.
An excellent point with remarkably little to do with what you quoted you were disagreeing with.y8c616 said: