Wii/Wii U

[finalark]

Black Ops got a 8.5. Duke Nukem got a 5. Madden got an 8. FF14 got an 8. DC Online got an 8. Just go on Metacritic and you will see the average scores for a bunch of triple A titles that got below a 9.

A few things:

If you actually look at the details, a majority of reviewers gave Black Ops a score of 90 or above. Duke Nukem just sucked *** so hard that nobody could say it was good. Madden gets an eight every year and I want to go slap whoever thought that DCO and FFXIV deserved and 8.

This doesn't disprove my point that for most reviewers an 8 or a 7 is an average game.

But the reason these games do get a 9 is because they are deserving. Zelda, Mario, Uncharted, Batman...they are all deserving.

The first Uncharted got 8s (again, "average") scores when it was still a relatively unknown franchise. Then when Sony promoted the **** out of U2 the game started getting 9s and 10s all across the board. Although I won't argue that Batman doesn't deserve to be scored high.

As for Zelda and Mario, Nintendo's fanbase would go ballistic if either one of their precious titles got a score below a 9. Just look at what happened when Gamespot gave TP a score of *gasp* 8.8.

But yeah, I agree with you on the scale. What would you propose then? A letter system? A "star" system? Or simply a "fun factor" system?

Or how about reviews just give you their opinion then instead of being lazy and just looking at a number you actually have to take all of five minuets to read the damn thing?

I would also be nice if critics would actually, you know, criticize big name titles for once. Go read most publications' review of Ocarina of Time 3D and you'll just be told what you want to hear, that it's a timeless classic that completely is untouched by the oh-so-evil taint of modern gaming. Then go read 1-Up's review, the most honestly review of a game I have ever read in my life, and behold the truth.

On the off hand, if you want proof that the 1-10 scale is broken take a look at how IGN has more positive reviews than anything else on their site:

http://www.metacritic.com/publication/ign?filter=games

 

[theeboredone]

This doesn't disprove my point that for most reviewers an 8 or a 7 is an average game.

I'll be the first to admit that I do judge overall scores to see if a game is worth checking out. With that being said, my collection on the PS3 mainly consists of 9's or higher. But that also goes back to the fact I don't have much money to begin with, and games that I end up do buying, I wait until I can get them for half or less. But at the same time, another factor is how much time I'll spend with each game. I'm not gonna be buying Uncharted 3 or Batman, simply because I know I can finish both within a rent's time.

The first Uncharted got 8s (again, "average") scores when it was still a relatively unknown franchise. Then when Sony promoted the **** out of U2 the game started getting 9s and 10s all across the board. Although I won't argue that Batman doesn't deserve to be scored high.

Have you played Uncharted 1 and 2? If you have, then you oughta know why one deserves a higher score over the other. No one was giving a rat's *** about Uncharted 2 until it started boasting those GOTY awards. The game stepped itself up in every aspect and was worthy of its scores.

As for Zelda and Mario, Nintendo's fanbase would go ballistic if either one of their precious titles got a score below a 9. Just look at what happened when Gamespot gave TP a score of *gasp* 8.8.

I'll agree with you on the OoT front. Too many people playing that game with nostalgia glasses on. But judging a port/remake is a bit different than judging a fresh new game.

Or how about reviews just give you their opinion then instead of being lazy and just looking at a number you actually have to take all of five minuets to read the damn thing?

Not to stereotype, but there's a reason why gamers get associated with things like ADD. They don't care about reading much to begin with. I don't think journalists would thrive if people had to sit down and read. That's also why there are video reviews.

I would also be nice if critics would actually, you know, criticize big name titles for once. Go read most publications' review of Ocarina of Time 3D and you'll just be told what you want to hear, that it's a timeless classic that completely is untouched by the oh-so-evil taint of modern gaming. Then go read 1-Up's review, the most honestly review of a game I have ever read in my life, and behold the truth.

Zero Punctuation. No scores and endless bashing.

On the off hand, if you want proof that the 1-10 scale is broken take a look at how IGN has more positive reviews than anything else on their site:

http://www.metacritic.com/publication/ign?filter=games

IGN is definitely more lenient on their scores vs others. At the same time, if you search a video game, and see IGN's score, they usually fall in the same spectrum as others around a point give or take.

 

[finalark]

Have you played Uncharted 1 and 2? If you have, then you oughta know why one deserves a higher score over the other. No one was giving a rat's *** about Uncharted 2 until it started boasting those GOTY awards. The game stepped itself up in every aspect and was worthy of its scores.

Yes, I have played both of them. ****, I'm pretty sure I'm one of the five people who played U1 way before U2 was even announced. And honestly, I found U1's campaign to be a bit more enjoyable than U2's oddly enough. I think that this generation's fixation on multiplayer is seriously what boosted U2's scores compared to U1.

Not to stereotype, but there's a reason why gamers get associated with things like ADD. They don't care about reading much to begin with. I don't think journalists would thrive if people had to sit down and read. That's also why there are video reviews.

And this is part of the reason why half of this generation is ********.

Zero Punctuation. No scores and endless bashing.

No. ZP isn't a review show, its a little comedy sketch with about as much credibility as an angry fanboy ranging about how WW sucks because it isn't the same exact game that OOT was or some nonsense.

And what I meant to say is that in 1-Ups review they talk about parts of the game that haven't aged well while also talking about the thing the game does well. An honest review letting you know exactly what you're in for as long as you're not blinded by nostalgia.

IGN is definitely more lenient on their scores vs others. At the same time, if you search a video game, and see IGN's score, they usually fall in the same spectrum as others around a point give or take.

Um, if you didn't take notice that means that a vast majority of reviews hand out high scores like cotton candy at a carnival.

EDIT: Being hypocritical, I use a 1-5 scale when I review things. Since, as you said, most people won't even read a review. I believe that 1-5 is a much better system because its hard to abuse. Each point can sum up the quality of the game in a sentence.

1 = Borderline unplayable garbage (Sonic '06, Super Man 64)
2 = Below average shovelware (licensed crap)
3 = Average (games that aren't bad and can be pretty fun but fail to be particularly memorable)
4 = Above Average (games that stand out above the usually stuff, but suffer from some heavy flaws)
5 = Outstanding (not perfect, but its an absolute must own for any fan of the game's genre)

 

[The Real Gamer]

This argument is meaningless considering that video games (like moves and books) are pretty much an art form, therefore there is no definite right or wrong in terms of judging a game.

Reviewers can be spot on with their numerical reviews, and at the same time they can also be way off. It all depends on the perception of both the reader and the reviewer. That's why it's so important for people that are unsure of a game to read into MULTIPLE reviews from MULTIPLE sources instead of seeing a "10" on IGN and thinking the game is supposed to be the greatest thing ever.

The real idiots in this whole scenario are the gamers that end up getting disappointed with their purchase or discouraged from purchasing a certain game just because of a few numbers they see on the internet.

 

[---]

Agreed. It's all opinion, there is no true reviewer that knows best.

 

[theeboredone]

Though reviewers + word of mouth will still help with deciding if I should spend 60 dollars or not xP.

 

[Claire Diviner]

As far as reviews go, I do pay some attention and use it as a determining factor of just how much I want a game, not necessarily whether or not I will get a game. Duke Nukem got a terrible review everywhere, but I still got the game. Yeah, it's as bland as bland can get, but I still oddly like it.

For me, if there's a game I want, I will get it, reviews be damned, and be the judge of said game for myself. Also, on the comment of DC Universe Online earlier, I own and have played the game (and still play) since launch. I can tell you right now, that during the initial release, an 8 may seem a bit too nice. I would probably go with a 6 at lowest, 7 at highest. The only thing that saves it is the DC license, and the voice talent (Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill are always magic). Now with the improvements they have since made, the DLC, the fixes, and the other convenient features, the game has definitely become much better and would certainly warrant a score of 8.

Also, I find it weird how some reviewers are already judging the Wii U for its lack of DVD/Blue-ray support, one controller per console thing, the flaws with how the controller works at the moment, etc.. I mean, the system is about a year away from launch, and they're already criticizing it. Yeah, you have your well-known reviewers praising the idea, but it's the not-so-well-known ones bashing it.

For starters, lack of DVD/Blue-ray support is of no consequence, seeing as in today's age, people should already own a DVD player, Blue-ray player, PS2, 360 and/or a PS3, all of which can play DVDs and the PS3 of which can play Blue-rays. So the addition of DVD/Blue-ray support on the Wii U would be redundant, and it would most likely make the system price more expensive. The one controller thing may seem stupid, but I don't believe it will really affect the software released, especially multiplayer, since I'm positive they will implement a control scheme suitable for use with the Wii Remote/Nunchuck and Classic Controller. Let's face it, I'm sure we'd rather play a fighting game with the Classic controller anyway. As for the Wii U controller having problems with working well, that's what the R&D is for, and with such a huge time gap before the system's launch, it goes without saying that knowing Nintendo, they'll have fixed whatever bugs the controller has.

Spoiler

inb4 "cool story bro"/tl;dr

 

[OmegaXXII]

I never listen to reviews, heck, I am looking to buy my first ever Phoenix Wright games from the WiiWare and it received alot of critism, mostly bashing the series of games, it received a "5" out of "10", and I know that's not right for that game, surely it's a better series as I've heard.

I never will take reviews seriously, while they are helpful in pointing out flaws and such; it is still worth getting whatever catches my attention regardless what someone's opinion is, it's my opinion that matters when it comes to playing it, often times it turns out to be quite the opposite, heck, alot of good games I've gotten have gotten negative reviews which sounded silly, in the end, it all opinion from a reviewer.

 

[theeboredone]

There will always be bad reviewers, but PW has an overall positive score on Metacritic. An 81 to be exact >_>. Don't know what can of worms you opened.

I guess it varies. If you have money to throw around to buy games, go for it. I rely on video game reviews just as much as I rely on movie reviews. I'm not gonna see a movie that has a 50% on Rotten Tomatoes. There definitely has to be some sort of interest I need to have, but it also has to get a great rating.

 

[The Real Gamer]

I miss the days where you could get any game you thought looked interesting without the worry of it being good or not since your parents would always get the game for you. :'(

 

[Luigitoilet]

I don't. It was terrible renting a game from Blockbuster, finding out it's a POS and being stuck with it for a week.

Superman 64 :s

 

[theeboredone]

Superman 64...worst day of my life.

 

[Fuelbi]

I miss the days where you could get any game you thought looked interesting without the worry of it being good or not since your parents would always get the game for you. :'(

I can still do that

 

[OmegaXXII]

I don't. It was terrible renting a game from Blockbuster, finding out it's a POS and being stuck with it for a week.

Superman 64 :s

Well LT, what would you prefer, renting a horrible game for a week or buying a horrible game and regreting the purchase? Yeah, I think it's obvious that renting titles that you aren't sure of would be wise, although, I never rent anything, I hardly go by friend suggestions or my own interest in a game, reviews? Not so much, it helps to see the action for yourself though.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

When I was REALLY young, my parents just bought games seemingly at random.

I discovered some games I love and consider great classics, even though today I wouldn't have even given them a second glance.

Glover 64 is an example. I was at the age when I started buying the games for myself at that point, but Glover 64 is one of the games I got for christmas.

I overlooked it at first, going instead for the OTHER game I got, Mario Kart 64. When I got bored of racing CPU's (Or my family, who were even WORSE than the CPU's) I put in Glover.

It doesn't look it, but it was a great game

I wonder how many other titles I overlooked that had great potential like that

 

[theeboredone]

Darkwing Duck for the NES. Playing that as a kid...hardest game ever.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Well LT, what would you prefer, renting a horrible game for a week or buying a horrible game and regreting the purchase? Yeah, I think it's obvious that renting titles that you aren't sure of would be wise, although, I never rent anything, I hardly go by friend suggestions or my own interest in a game, reviews? Not so much, it helps to see the action for yourself though.

Both scenarios are bad. I mostly use reviews to find out if a game is broken like Superman 64 or Sonic 2006. The rest is far too subjective to trust someone else on.

 

[F8AL]

So yeah, the Wii U can handle two controllers/tablets.

I read this on a gaming blog but I forgot the source.

 

[ZIO]

I was sure I read it as they're looking into it as of the moment. That and I thought they would be attempting four controllers.


Meh. I'll wait until the article comes across on the forum I go to.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I think 2 is about perfect, assuming that we can use 4 wiimotes with the 2 tablets and that makes for some amazing local multiplayer possibilities.

 

[theeboredone]

Because we know online play is gonna suck. Might as well improve on local

 

[Luigitoilet]

That's pretty funny, but I still prefer local over online multiplayer any day.

It would be nice if they got their act together with the internet as well, but I'm honestly more excited about the prospects of local MP

 

[theeboredone]

I get ya. Though I will admit that I have longed moved away from the days where I'd call over friends to play locally, or vice versa. If I want to play friend, I feel better off just sitting on my couch, going online and playing him there. Yeah it takes away from some things like trash talking and stuff, but I dunno...especially on college...ti's rather hard to invite people over to play.

With that being said, Mario Party is definitely gonna be fun. Local or online.

 

[Vinylic.]

Rumor: Wii U Will To Have Open Online System, Possibly Using EA Origin


Did you guys read this one yet???

With new game hardware finally on the way after five-plus years of using the same systems, it's time for the rumor floodgates to open. I recommend taking this info with a heavy grain of salt and preparing to not have a real answer until whenever Nintendo decides to spill the good about the Wii U.

The relatively new Nintendo fan site Wii U Go brings us this rumor, which supposedly comes from an EA intern by way of a friend who's a network engineer at the publisher. If that sounds several steps too far removed to be trustworthy, we'll get to that.

The crux of the rumor is that Nintendo has been working closely with third-party developers to help build the Wii U's online infrastructure. Since many of those developers expressed annoyance that Xbox Live is such a closed system, Nintendo will be embracing a more flexible, open-ended philosophy that should make working on the system less annoying for third-party publishers and developers.

Here's where things get more interesting (if exponentially more questionable as well): Supposedly Nintendo is in talks with EA to make EA's Origin service the digital distribution platform for Wii U. This would grow Origin significantly for EA and (according to the source) help Nintendo win back Western gamer support by putting their digital distribution strategy in the hands of a company that understands what gamers want from an online platform.

The source says that Valve has also talked to Nintendo about using Steam on the Wii U, but EA is "aggressively persuading Nintendo."

Now as said previously, this supposed source is an intern who has talked to a network engineer. In other words, you should be very skeptical about this. If I had to put down money, my best guess would be that the open online infrastructure is accurate but that if Nintendo and EA are talking about bringing Origin to Wii U, it's probably a very minor point of discussion that's not terribly likely to happen.

That said, even if we're being skeptical, we can still consider this hypothetical future. Do you think Origin being a part of Wii U would make sense? Would that help you believe in Nintendo's ability to do online better than they did on the Wii?

It's a weekend, so getting in touch with either Nintendo or EA for a comment on this story is difficult. We'll update if we hear back, though.

[Thanks to Corey for the tip]

 

[Master Xanthan]

Hahahahahahahahaha, EA? Oh gosh. If anything, Nintendo should go with Steam. From what I hear, Origin sucks ****.

Edit: Of coarse, this is a rumor. But if they pick one of the 2, go with Steam, definitely.

 

[F8AL]

Nintendo doesn't have a good track record when it comes to online game, why would EA want the Wii U to exclusively use Origin?

 

[theeboredone]

Steam got hacked recently, and I'm not sure if it's been confirmed or not if credit card info was stolen.

With that being said, I don't think EA's security is tighter than Steam's....Steam just happened to be the victim.

I do think EA has quality games, but then some divisions are a load of bull. I have not tried Origin, so I don't know how it works or if there's anything great about it. IF this is true, then consider this a strong signing for EA.

@F8AL, think about it. Nintendo working with EA's Origin. Essentially, you purchase games from their market to play on the Wii U = profit.

 

[Master Xanthan]

Steam got hacked recently, and I'm not sure if it's been confirmed or not if credit card info was stolen.

With that being said, I don't think EA's security is tighter than Steam's....Steam just happened to be the victim.

I do think EA has quality games, but then some divisions are a load of bull. I have not tried Origin, so I don't know how it works or if there's anything great about it. IF this is true, then consider this a strong signing for EA.

@F8AL, think about it. Nintendo working with EA's Origin. Essentially, you purchase games from their market to play on the Wii U = profit.

I think I heard about Steam getting hacked as well. But considering Steam has been around for much longer than origin, chances are origin could easily get hacked as well.

 

[UberMario]

Hahahahahahahahaha, EA? Oh gosh. If anything, Nintendo should go with Steam. From what I hear, Origin sucks ****.

Edit: Of coarse, this is a rumor. But if they pick one of the 2, go with Steam, definitely.

^This. Origin is garbage compared to Steam, to be honest. It'd be great if a distribution service worked closely with Nintendo, especially if it meant better games than the majority of what is on WiiWare.

I'd be surprised if this is true, though.

 

[Vinylic.]

I just hope it isn't.

Steam is the best. Nintendo should team up with them. But I fear nintendo might buy steam afterwards.

 

[F8AL]

Mario Kart Wii bundle loses GameCube support, just in time for the holidays

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/11/14/mario-kart-wii-bundle-loses-gamecube-support-just-in-time-for-t/

 

[theeboredone]

Old news. Someone already posted that.

 

[Fuelbi]

Oddly I'm completely fine with that? How old is the GC now? 10 years? And besides anyone who really wanted the Wii for the GC either already has a GC or they bought an old Wii. And nintendo's being nice lately and keep dropping and dropping the price of the Wii, so they gotta make money somehow, and I'm guessing that cutting the GC off the wii is a way to do this

 

[F8AL]

Oddly I'm completely fine with that? How old is the GC now? 10 years? And besides anyone who really wanted the Wii for the GC either already has a GC or they bought an old Wii. And nintendo's being nice lately and keep dropping and dropping the price of the Wii, so they gotta make money somehow, and I'm guessing that cutting the GC off the wii is a way to do this

Yeah, I think this is a rather smart move of Nintendo to do. This shouldn't bother TOO many people.

 

[UberMario]

I just hope it isn't.

Steam is the best. Nintendo should team up with them. But I fear nintendo might buy steam afterwards.

They would have to absorb Valve before they could get Steam, which is highly unlikely considering that they both have totally different business practices.

 

[F8AL]

They would have to absorb Valve before they could get Steam, which is highly unlikely considering that they both have totally different business practices.

Yeah, I don't see that happening. Don't think you'll see Original or Steam on the Wii U IMO.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Nintendo already talked about working with EA for their online, when the Wii U was introduced. Hell, some guy from EA spoke at E3 for like 20 minutes.

 

[Master Xanthan]

Well looks we'll have nintendo online passes and bull**** like that if nintendo works with EA

 

[Yoshi]

At first I was skeptical on the Wii U, but the more I read about it, the more I am becoming confident it will be a fine successor to the Wii.

 

[The Real Gamer]

At first I was skeptical on the Wii U, but the more I read about it, the more I am becoming confident it will be a fine successor to the Wii.

Holy crap you're ancient. Member for 10 years?? o.0