darkjak

Little content. When you wait for so long for a game, and then barge out 500 krona, you expect more than 5 hours. Also when you have to use strange methods to solve simple puzzles. I don't need a damn key to open that gate, the fence next to it is knee high!

To make it feel like Hyrule moves on. How many thousand years can the same architecture be appreciated? Is Hyrule some sort of medeival-ish dictatorship where the royal family and church does everything to stop the Hylian people from getting better standards of life? Imagine if a new age begins. Where the Monarchy is being questioned, and the Gerudos are threatening to conquer Hyrule. Soldiers are wearing the armour of old, but are getting "modern" firearms. Where Ganon uses lots of Gerudos with guns, and magic beings like Stalfos and dragons to take over the world, Hyrule instead tries to defend itself with aircraft. Hyrule castle town has just received its first "skyscraper", and while there's some extent of electricity, Kakariko and other towns farther away still live in the ways of old, rarelly coming in contact with the new technologies.

Like you wrote below, the appearance adds to the experience. If Nintend had made Wind Waker a new franchise, the story, characters and probably a big part of the gameplay would have changed. The team working on WW thought at least to some extent "let's make a Zelda". Had they not thought that way, and instead thought "let's make an adventure franchise centered arround sailing and exploring a large sea", we might have gotten something that feels even more different. Punch Out looks better than I could ever immagine, because it's stylish, and because I didn't really have any expectations of anything else (Unlike with Zelda, where we had OOT, MM and the 2000 demo that told me before what the game was going to look like). Imagine if Rockstar were to bring out a GTA game for the PS3. Not only have we got the history of 3D GTA's, they even give us a trailer with the hottest, most realistic graphics ever. And a year later they show the new look, which has vector graphics more resembling Tron, Defcon or Rez. The graphics would be stylish, some people would consider it amazing, modern and imaginative graphics. But it wouldn't be GTA, nor would it be what the audience had been promised. Imagine if we turn this arround COMPLETELY. What if there would be a Zelda with nudity, blood, cursing and darker than life-graphics. Would you be happy then? I most certainly wouldn't. The reason I want a more modern Zelda is because all Zeldas supposedly take place with about a hundred years between. That would mean that sooner or later, hylian technology would become more advanced. I'm not talking about a complete change into a depiction of today.

That is correct. But one thing however: don't kill the messenger. I just remember that before WW was released, Nintendo was crap because the games were small and it was difficult to pirate. After suddenly there was a storm on the internet where everyone said WW is kiddy. I didn't feel that WW was kiddy, I just thought it was plain old ugly, and a dissapointment after the prommise Nintendo had made on E3 2000: When Zelda took the leap to 3D with Ocarina of Time, they showed how a Zelda game is supposed to look. And claiming that WW looks Zelda too is just plain weird. In that case Mario should be about twenty times as cell shaded as WW, and so should Kirby, Pilotwings and pretty much all Nintendo franchises. Should MGS be cell shaded too? I mean, ALL 8-bit, and most 16 bit games looked toony because of technical limitiations. I'm saying that if Nintendo had made a new franchise called quite simply Wind Waker (with a DS sequel called Wind Waker: Phantom hourglass), I wouldn't have said anything. I would have thought that it kicks butt. For me, the first leap into 3D for every franchise sets how it's supposed to look. I'm not complaining on Tales of Symphonia or Punch Out Wii, because those franchises made it into 3D looking that way. I would be equally pissed if Jet Set Radio would come in a realistic looking version.

I definitelly say realistic graphics. Cel shading can be somethong for the portable consoles. Nintendo should most certainly change the series, but cel shading firstly doesen't feel very Zelda. Secondly, Wind Waker was the game that single-handedly gave the GC it's kiddy-image. The idea of a Zelda taking place in a more advanced hyrule would kick ass. Imagine a steampunk-ish zelda: Like I've said so many times before: if Nintendo want to make a cel-shaded action-rpg, make a new franchise. Leave Zelda alone.

Yes, the Wii has had a lot of PS2 ports. However, I just think that the wrong titles have been ported. I'd love to see Black (with online multiplayer), MGS3 or maybe an upgraded version of Metropolis Street Racer. Daytona USA would also kick ass. GTA on a stationary Nintendo console is also long overdue. The developers ARE most truly lazy on the Wii. Hopefully this casual trend will die off soon.

To be truthful, they didn't. CDi, Jaguar and 3DO all failed misserably. You mus also think of the inflation's effect on the price. If you translate todays pound with that of 1995, you'll realise that those formats cost ridiculous ammounts of money. I don't have an inflation index table in front of me, but I'd think that the 700 pounds of that time are worth about 1000 pounds today!

Well, it's time for the secnd part of the last gen comparsion: What do you think?

I used to have the same problem. For some reason it got better once I got a new update. Unfortunatelly that patch came right after the Metroid Channel got discontinued.

Question: how the F**k do you create an even simpler game than what I just said? How do you streamline the controlls more than aim and shoot? where you in a majority of the missions don't even need to turn arround to shoot enemies that have flown past, because the game is on rails? Your comparasint between Brawl and Melee is just...strange. I've owned all the Smash Bros games since the N64 original, and I can't see any simplifications what so ever. The game might be a bit slower than it's predecessor, and there are the "final smash" attacks, but beyond that the game's the same as its predecessors. Smash Bros was never suitable for casuals, and I can't see why anyone would think that Brawl somehow was simplified. The casual gamers whom won't pick up Starfox with simple controlls are a lost cause, because these people have no interest in gaming and never will move on to the deeper games, because of preciselly this lack of interrest. Even if you give them twenty games with increasingly high complexity will they not carry through. What Nintendo have done with Mario Galaxy has been to simplify a game to suit a demographic that quite simply has no interrest in such a game. Casuals want to play for maybe an hour a week. They don't want a game that takes 60, 20, 10 or even 5 hours to complete. They don't want any unlockables, and preferrably they don't want any level progression. They want to be able to pick any mode, level and song the first time they boot the game, and just have a bit of fun. I would preffer if Nintendo would make core games that casuals can play, rather than it being the other way arround. I mean, imagine if the car industry listened purely to the non-drivers, because they're many. The ones whom use the car once a week to go shopping. Who want cars that have a gas, a wheel, breaks and who think it's complicated to repair the engine with any other tool than a sledgehammer. Then all the companys would be manufacturing variations of the Tuc Tuc: And when drivers cry out for a car with air conditioning, four wheels, comfortable seats, a radio, sound insulation, and with an appearance that's less embarrasing, the car companies start pointing fingers at each other saying "but that's their job", and then General Motors say "Hah, people with drivers licenses are never happy, thereby we will not listen to ANYTHING they say".

The starfox example I gave before shows that it doesent have to be this way. Remember Lylat Wars? There were branching paths in the game. On the first level there was a section where you had to fly between rocks, which required you to lean the Arwing very preciselly. If you failed, you got to take the easy path, if you suceeded, you got to take the harder path. If you take this one step further, and as I said, add a challenge mode with short bursts of play, then that would be complex enough to not be dumbed down, and yet accessible enough for the casual. Core people want to unlock stuff and end up on online leaderboards, while casuals want to have fun for 10 minutes. I personally don't consider Smash Bros Brawl dumbed down, but I do think that the weapons have too much power in Mariokart Wii. I think that it's completely idiotic to tell where the secret stars are in Mario Galaxy. What was the point? Casuals per definition don't care about unlocking everything. As a matter of fact, if they buy Mario Galaxy, they apparently have the intent to, knowingly or unknowingly, move into the Core demography.

So, what are your thoughts? I think that this is something than Nintendo should think of. Rather than focusing on making these quite unexciting casual games that people whom consider themselves core keep hating, why don't Nintendo bring out core games with casual controlls. Theoretically Sin and Punishment could be a game like this. Imagine how simple Starfox cold be with the Wiimote! Use the wiimote to point where the Arwing's supposed to go. Shoot with the trigger, fire bombs with A. As you get used to the controlls you can use the volountary stuff, like barrel rolls, lock on shots and loops. Waverace could also be simple, with an accelerator, no brakes and holding the wiimote sideways, and lean it to turn or lean the jetski. And to further cater for casuals, there could be a challenge mode similar to that in Timesplitters, where players can play in short bursts and do different whacky things. But Nintendo still need to focus more on the core. Nintendo are market leaders. They don't have excuses like small audience, high development costs or that there's too many core games out there to compete. Nintendo are filthy rich and need to invest some of that money into new franchises. Like I've said before, every console, bar Nintendo's has had an attempted first party Gran Turismo-beater. Sega had Sega GT, Sony have Gran Turismo and Microsoft have Forza. I really cannot see why Nintendo won't try it, except for pure stubbornness. Well, that was my rant, what are your oppinions.

The box was a fair bit more powerful than the other formats. If I recall correctly, the XB was twice as powerful as the PS2, which should mean that certain PS2/low budget games had so low polycounts and textures that the XB could handle it.

The 360's quality's a weird little riddle. To begin with I can mention that my friends Xbox first didn't want to open the disc tray, since the disc had fallen out of place. Then a few DAYS after he got it back, the console could no longer contact the controller. Just last week the XB at AGES got the red ring of doom. Anyone know if these rumours of the new 60GB XB having better quality are true?

I've looked at it, and I've heard rumours that this new 60 GB version has better build quality (AKA, no red ring of d00m). Is this true?

Yay! A regular fighter! Just hope that it won't suck.

I think that list was quite OK. But how come that none of the music from the MGS games is in there? Starfox? F-Zero? I mean, my neighbour whose a rocker, and non gamer sometimes plays Big Blue or Mute City on his guitar just because he likes the sound. He even plays doctor Wiley some times.

Actually, at least I wanted, and still want a game like OOT. The problem is that the overworld isn't as interresting as the one in Ocarina of Time. The problem is that the game was too easy, and that objects rarelly were used outside the dungeons they were first introduced. I want to once again be able to talk to every single character in the entire game, and maybe be able to buy masks to get alternate conversations. The horse scenes weren't that well implemented, and the surroundings were far from as epic as the first trailer promised. In Ocarina of Time, you could feel the cold when evening came and turned in to night. HOWEVER, I think that TP was the best Zelda since OOT. And like IGN wrote, I'd like a deeper story, maybe a deviation from the old games somehow. What I don't want is a cel-shaded Zelda with some crazy gameplay-wise deviation (if the combat system will be somehow turnbased I will find out whom made the decision and mace him).

Because all the other thread where anyone's said anything bad about the Wii has become locked. What's wrong with having ONE thread where people can talk about the Wiis shortcomings?

1) Nintendo Nintendo guarantees me classic franchises like Metroid, Zelda, Mario and Starfox. And Nintendo games have a higher overall quality than any other developers games. 2) Potentially the best controlls EVER If developers quit just using the Wiimote for wagglathons, they could create games with the best controlls throughout history. The Wiimote can acheive better controls than any other console in the FPS genre, sword games, lightgun games and surely a whole bunch of others. 3) Quiet, cheap and reliable. The Wii is more or less like a Toyota. It's cheap, quiet, and it doesent break down. EVER. While beemers get rare after 15 years, you can still find LOADS of old 70's Celicas roaming the streets. I think the same situation will happen with the 360 and PS3. 4) Virtual console/ Wiiware The ability to download old classics kicks butt, and Wiiware enables small studios to release their low-budget games and grow. 5) Not embarrasing While the PS3 and 360 are behemoths which shout out on the top of their lungs "LOOK, A GEEK LIVES HERE!!!", the Wii is discrete, and looks stylish. Like just about any gadget. Perfect when you have female company. Especially since she'll be interrested in playing because she can easilly learn. And here are my minuses (couldn't think of 5): 1) Variety Although the Wii speaks out to a lot more people, that doesen't automatically mean that the variety of GOOD games is that great. The Wii has no beat-em up in the classical meaning (the only one AT ALL that I know of is Mortal Kombat), and a lack of first person shooters that aren't about WWII. I mean, where are the at least somewhat realistic racers? 2) Kotakus R suxxorz Nintendos constant complaints against their old fans, that the storage problem is exclusive to kotakus, and then changing their mind as soon as it's clear it isn't exclusive to the kotakus was just stupid. A surefire way to loose fans. And then to talk about the core being insatiable is just as clever as going to the UN and say "Our country hereby has declared peace as stupid, so we're gonna go to war just cuz peace sucks". 3) Technically inferior Although I put the low price as a plus, the inferior technical specs are still a big minus. Not that I personally care, but it does mean that there are lots of "multiformat" games we're not getting, or get crappy PS2/PSP version ports we're getting.

Well, when Wii Sports Boxing was shown, people thought that THAT was the new punch out. The question is really how much you can do? The basics are the same: camera behind the boxer, suggesting you can't move arround the ring, and it's boxing for pete's sake. There won't be any kicks, no low attack. So the question is how much Nintendo will be able to change the combat system with those restrictions. I am however not thinking that it'll be the same as WSB, I'm just saying that Nintendo will have to do a lot for it to be different enough to purchase.

I can't really feel that many Nintendo franchises are feeling tired nowadays. Why? Nintendo have a history of reinventing and changing their franchises, unlike for example Core withe the Tomb Raider games of the 90's. I can agree that it's ridiculous that EA release new Need for Speed/FIFA/MADDEN/NHL games year in and year out with some graphical tweeks and new player names. But that's not what Nintendo do. We are lucky if we get one game per generation (apart from Mario Party). And at least getting that reinvention of an old franchise every 5 years is hardly to be called unsatiable. People have been like "Nintend are casual now! FACE IT! Making core games would be stupid and totally contradicts the point of the Wii" when you say that you for example want Nintendo to make an FPS based on the Metroid Prime engine or a Gran Turismo beater. YES, I acknowlege that casual games have a place on the Wii, but Nintendo shouldn't jump ship on delivering core games. What the people who complain about the Wii having too many casual games is as a matter of fact about us wanting the best selling console, with the lowest development costs from the new generation to have a wider, or at least matching spectrum of games when compared to the others. We want to feel appreciated, rather than Nintendo, the wealthiest games company on earth, with the best overall game quality pointing their finger at us and saying "Haha you are stupid because you don't agree with our marketing strategy", and then pointing at the third parties and saying "It's THEIR duty to deliver the games we don't wanna do". We also don't want Nintendo to ruin our favourite franchises to better suit the casuals. One rule all games designers learn (apparently appart from the ones at Nintendo) is that the outcome of a game is skill. If you want to develop games where the winner is to be decided by random, go manufacture dices. And that all people whom complain about the ammount of core games are fanboys of the other formats is plain bull. I first bought a Wii, and I've only for the last six months been thinking of buying a 360. Although Nintendo have made amends to some extent by announcing Sin and Punishment 2 as well as Punch Out, there are still games series we want to see, and some genres that need to be filled. The good thing is that Nintendo have said that they only will announce games 6 months before release, which meens there might be some cool games arround the corner. The above announcments were just what was necessary to save at least my faith in them.

OK, and this relates to the Wii in what way? Lock thread and permanent ban on this guy, please!

Like I've said, the graphics aren't that awful as you make it out to be. Remember that there's going to be a lot going on on the screen, unlike in RE4!

The graphics look good, but I think that the guns seem a bit inacurate, and the levels are a bit linear. I hope this becomes as good as Goldeneye was back in the day, and that there'll be a feature to turn guns on or off online.