"For a Wii Game" and why I hate that statement

[Necromancer1991]

Yes I know this may seem like whining, but I hate when people say this, if I were to release say, Red Steel on the PS3 using Move and updating the graphics would it just be a good game period? Why do people insist on saying this, is t because good Wii games aren't as good as a good Xbox game or a good PS3 game? I just want to know, am I the only guy who feels this way?

 

[Marter]

The Wii is less powerful than the other two consoles out right now. That is fact. If a Wii game were to have been made for one of those two consoles, developers would be able to do more with their game, far more likely than not, making it better.

 

[Limzz]

What are these "good Wii games" you speak of?

 

[Scabadus]

You've answered your own question: "[it's] because good Wii games aren't as good as a good Xbox game or a good PS3 game". They're good for what they are and if you want to mess around on the Wii the Red Steel may be good for that, but if you want a great experiance go look on another console. It's good for what it is, it's still not great though.

 

[rokkolpo]

super mario galaxy is awesome, whatever console you have come by in your lifetime.

2 will be even better YAY!

 

[Matt_LRR]

Pretty much what the above have stated. Personally, I am of the opinion that motion control is more detrimental to the gameplay experience than anything else, so while Mario Galaxy 2 might be the best wii game ever, I'd still rather play just about anything else.

It's great for a wii game, sure, but I don't like wii games.

-m

 

[oppp7]

I'm guessing it's because the hardware is better on the other consoles.

 

[Snarky Username]

Well in modern gaming is around 60% graphics, 30% gameplay and 10% story.

The graphics on the Wii are nothing compared to the PS3 or XBox 360 so graphics being good for a Wii game" would mean that they wouldn't be as good as an XBox game or a PS3 game.

Gameplay is the same because of the Wii motion control. It should have been the best thing ever to video games, but it just became a gimmick and now it cripples other wise good games. So in terms of gameplay, a Wii game will almost never be as good as an XBox 360 or PS3 game mainly because of the motion control. Some games can get past this, an example being Super Mario Galaxy. And the reason Super Mario Galaxy could get past the motion control is that the game barely used it.

Spoiler: TL;DR

The reasons that people say "Good for a Wii game" is because of graphics and because of the motion control. Many of the great games on the Wii would have been much better if they were on another console. But that's just my opinion.

 

[afaceforradio]

The Wii, technologically speaking, is a sub-par console in comparison to its counterparts and thus the games that go on it tend to be smaller and less easy on the eye. Because of this horrible games are often made simple because they literally can't do alot with the Wii. Not to mention that a Wii game pretty much has to incorporate the use of the Wii Mote and Nunchucks, which severely cripples the Wii in terms of flexibility. For example, you couldn't have a Battlefield 2 Bad Company 2 (even if the Wii's graphics were up to scratch) because the game would be horrible to play using those controllers. And let's face it, if you're going to buy a Wii joypad you may as well just get a 360 or a PS3.

 

[Wewt]

What they mean to say is that it's good relative to other Wii games. It needs extra clarification because the Wii has different standards set for a game, it has motion control and bad graphics compared to the two other consoles which don't really break the norm of consoles.
Whether or not this justifies the double standard is probably subjective.

 

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

The Wii is less powerful than the other two consoles out right now. That is fact. If a Wii game were to have been made for one of those two consoles, developers would be able to do more with their game, far more likely than not, making it better.

that's just a lie
i mean with some games, fair enough
but red steel 2 would be exactly the same, the only reason it didnt have more was because they ran out of time, nothing to do with power
you wouldnt even notice the graphical differences because of the artstyle

silent hill shattered memories, well the graphics are better than a few hd games anyway, there's no way it'd be better on a more powerful console

again galaxy and galaxy 2, would be no better

the thing is that argument only applies to badly done ports (unleashed wii was better than the hd versions, forgotten sands is supposedly as good) but these days most wii games are made around the wii so that there'd be no difference if they were on another console besides the controls since there's hardly anything they cant do that would make it better due to the wii's power

What are these "good Wii games" you speak of?

derp

You've answered your own question: "[it's] because good Wii games aren't as good as a good Xbox game or a good PS3 game". They're good for what they are and if you want to mess around on the Wii the Red Steel may be good for that, but if you want a great experiance go look on another console. It's good for what it is, it's still not great though.

when galaxy 2 wins every game of the year award, will this argument still apply?

 

[Eldarion]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.197438-Wii-Wings-Flap-Wii-Accessories-to-New-Lows

^There is this kind of thing for starters.

 

[Necromancer1991]

Yes sure but what happened to the days where a good game was a good game period, the original Xbox, the PS2, and the Gamecube never had this kind of labeling a good GC game was as good as a good PS2 game. Yes I know graphics wise that the XBox and the PS3 are technically superior but that shouldn't mean that a good game sucks under different circumstances, if their were no technical difference between consoles would people still say this. The main reason I hate this statement is the fact that it just makes people sound so goddamn arrogant. A good game on the Wii is better than a crappy game on the Xbox or PS3 and Equal to a good game on the Xbox and PS3

P.S. I agree with you AWL.

 

[mb16]

thing 1 [graphic]: type into youtube call of duty 4 wii comparison

thing 2 ["better controls]: after playing for so long you dont think/notice what the controls are, you just do it so saying a controller is better than another is pointless after # hours of game play

thing 3 [games]: look up best wii games and you will find a list of supermario ,wii sports, sonic, etc... .
do the same for pc/xbox/ps3 you will get games like gran turismo 3, halo3, uncharted, MW2, kill zone2, NBA.10. they are just a different level of gaming

 

[Scabadus]

You've answered your own question: "[it's] because good Wii games aren't as good as a good Xbox game or a good PS3 game". They're good for what they are and if you want to mess around on the Wii the Red Steel may be good for that, but if you want a great experiance go look on another console. It's good for what it is, it's still not great though.

when galaxy 2 wins every game of the year award, will this argument still apply?

IF Galaxy 2 wins every single game of the year award, I will come back to this thread and edit out my post. Then eat my hat.

 

[Marter]

The Wii is less powerful than the other two consoles out right now. That is fact. If a Wii game were to have been made for one of those two consoles, developers would be able to do more with their game, far more likely than not, making it better.

that's just a lie
i mean with some games, fair enough
but red steel 2 would be exactly the same, the only reason it didnt have more was because they ran out of time, nothing to do with power
you wouldnt even notice the graphical differences because of the artstyle

silent hill shattered memories, well the graphics are better than a few hd games anyway, there's no way it'd be better on a more powerful console

again galaxy and galaxy 2, would be no better

the thing is that argument only applies to badly done ports (unleashed wii was better than the hd versions, forgotten sands is supposedly as good) but these days most wii games are made around the wii so that there'd be no difference if they were on another console besides the controls since there's hardly anything they cant do that would make it better due to the wii's power

I don't feel like Red Steel 2 would have been exactly the same, and the graphics would have been better on either the 360 or PS3. Compare Red Steel 2 to Borderlands, and tell me there is no difference. I wasn't really talking about graphics when I was talking about how powerful a console is. The more powerful consoles could display more things on the screen as one example of what I mean. Take a look at the difference between Dead Rising on the 360, and Dead Rising on the Wii. Big difference there, despite the Wii version coming out later.

I feel that if Galaxy and Galaxy 2 were on more powerful consoles, you could have even bigger worlds, and more to do in them. They would be even better than they already are.

 

[Aura Guardian]

While I do hate it. I'm a proud Wii owner. I've played loads of amazing Wii titles.
When it comes to my Xbox 360 however, I usually say, "this is good...for a 360 game" Only Halo and Forza held my attention long enough.

 

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

You've answered your own question: "[it's] because good Wii games aren't as good as a good Xbox game or a good PS3 game". They're good for what they are and if you want to mess around on the Wii the Red Steel may be good for that, but if you want a great experiance go look on another console. It's good for what it is, it's still not great though.

when galaxy 2 wins every game of the year award, will this argument still apply?

IF Galaxy 2 wins every single game of the year award, I will come back to this threat and edit out my post. Then eat my hat.

we are talking about the same galaxy 2 which already the joint second highest game on the entire of metacritics with only a percentage behind ocarina of time arent we?
and the same galaxy 2 which is the sequel to galaxy 1 which won game of the year from gamespot, ign and gametrailers ahead of cod4 and where the sequel is supposedly better according to them as well right?

and you dont think it will win pretty much every game of the year award? really?

 

[Limzz]

The Wii is less powerful than the other two consoles out right now. That is fact. If a Wii game were to have been made for one of those two consoles, developers would be able to do more with their game, far more likely than not, making it better.

that's just a lie
i mean with some games, fair enough
but red steel 2 would be exactly the same, the only reason it didnt have more was because they ran out of time, nothing to do with power
you wouldnt even notice the graphical differences because of the artstyle

silent hill shattered memories, well the graphics are better than a few hd games anyway, there's no way it'd be better on a more powerful console

again galaxy and galaxy 2, would be no better

the thing is that argument only applies to badly done ports (unleashed wii was better than the hd versions, forgotten sands is supposedly as good) but these days most wii games are made around the wii so that there'd be no difference if they were on another console besides the controls since there's hardly anything they cant do that would make it better due to the wii's power

What are these "good Wii games" you speak of?

derp

How can you say Red Steel would be the same? Judging by your inability to come up with a better comment than "derp" I'll assume your intelligence is fairly low. Were you to possess a bit more comprehension you would see the many areas in which that game was cut down to fit the Wii. I'm sure the developers could have greatly improved the game with processing power beyond that of a pocket calculator and hardware that actually WORKS. For example, maybe they could have done a little less copypasta enviroments and enemies, and maybe not using the shortcut of cell shaded art.