JetSetWilly

It's worth every penny of £30. It's worth every penny of £39.99 come to think of it. A great game. I played it back to back and racked up 90 hours of gameplay. I have high hopes for the Wii version.

I've a mountain of PS2 content to get through (I was exceedingly late to the party). Just finished SoTC today. Next up, MGS3:Subsistence. And when I'm not doing that, I've a mountain of DS content to get through. /scratches head and ponders why exactly I need another console

From 1up's COD3 hands-on: Aiming is slightly trickier than movement, simply because it requires a bit more accuracy. You press A to look down your gun and B to fire, and while it works just fine, we did fine ourselves taking longer to line up perfect headshots than on the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions due to the sensitivity of the controller. It'll be interesting to see if this speed gets quicker after we spend more time with the game, since we only had about 30 minutes to test it out and we still felt a bit slow at the draw for long-range shots by the end of our session. It feels a lot more intuitive to press a button to throw a grenade than to press a button, pull your arm back, and throw your wrist forward in a straight line, after all. http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3154249 From 1up's latest Red Steel hands-on: The problem is that I didn't feel like the Wii Remote aim was going where I wanted it to go all the time. At certain moments it zipped around from one side of the screen to another when I thought I was holding the remote pretty still. An attending PR person thought a background light in the already pretty dark room might be messing with the Wii's sensor bar, which tracks the controller's movement. With the light off and the room totally dark, the aim problem was significantly improved. The aim still didn't feel as accurate as I expected, though. http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3154498 So, who do we believe? Doesn't sound vastly superior to me. Maybe the COD3 developers have done a better job than Ubisoft. I think my point still stands though, it is not proven that Wii FPS controls are better.

I'm sorry but unless you have actually tried this out (have you?) I just don't see how you can possibly say this. I have not read one single hands-on preview that states unequivocally that FPS controls on Wii are better than dual-analog. I don't recall dual-analog being a problem when I was blasting through TimeSplitters 2, why are people so down on it? Wii touted itself as the new home of FPS. A bold claim, that has yet to be proven. FWIW I think there's very little to dispute in Matt's article, people just don't like to hear that sort of stuff is all.

I suspect Metroid will be pushed back further into 2007, probably autumn.

Won't there be a long wait for this anyhow? Next-gen Pro Evo is exclusive to 360 for 12 months.

dabookerman - I'm not sure I follow your response to my post. I agree with it, but I don't think I get what you don't like about what I said about MGS4. Someone posted earlier to say that graphics lose their wow factor quickly. That's true enough, but the Wii controller is not immune to the same effect. When the next Zelda comes and it is developed for the Wii from the ground up people will expect it to look better than TP. Else what new ground can it cover? In TP you can shake the controller to swing the sword. In the next Zelda the novelty of that will be gone.

I think it's also about what's appropriate for the genre. The trailers for MGS4 look incredible. Kojima needs the horsepower that the PS3 gives him in order to deliver the visual feast that is expected of him. It doesn't instantly mean MGS4 is a great game to play but the audience expectation of MG games is that each iteration is even more of a visual treat than the last. I don't think there'd be nearly as much hype about that game if it had PS2 visuals. In her interview with Destructoid on gonintendo Perrin Kaplan said that the other next-gen consoles have more power than the casual gamer/non-gamer needs in order to enjoy video-games. I think that's a very revealing quote of where Nintendo wants to head. EDIT: dabookerman speaks the truth. Excellent post.

What nonsense.

Wii Zelda has Cube graphics. Miyamoto did not let the dev team spend time polishing up the graphics for the Wii version: http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/726/726749p1.html I think the point is that Nintendo have skewed things too far in one direction. I don't think that the Wii controller is the be-all and end-all of a gameplay experience. It's the whole package. Graphics alone do not make a great game, but a great game is even better if it has great graphics. By the same token a game does not instantly become great solely because it uses the Wii controller.

Is this the confirmation we're looking for on Cube Zelda? http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=146167

NOA have confirmed to 1up.com that the Wii is region-locked . http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3153746

If you listened to the 1upyours podcast regularly you'd know that that is simply not true. 1up show a healthy cynicism towards all 3 platform holders. I welcome this sort of objective feedback because it means I'm more informed as a buyer and Nintendo have an opportunity to correct things. Who wants to listen to a podcast that just says ZOMG TEH WII-MOTE IS TEH M3GAT0N!!111!! Just like DS it's going to take time to exploit the potential. Luke Smith's point (the beardy bloke) is that the potential isn't proven now but in a year's time it could well be. Sounds like a reasonable thing to say to me. After all, the biggest launch game is a Cube port - just like DSs biggest launch game was an N64 port.

Many reasons. As I said in a different thread the control system that debuted with Ocarina of Time is proven and is excellent. I know I will like playing with that setup. The Wii version is a risk, it may be better but it may not. I've got to blow over £200 to take that risk and none of the hands-on reports I've read are exactly glowing about the Wii controls. Dec 8th is right before I've to cough-up a huge wedge to pay for 14 days skiing in Canada. So I can spend £30 on a game I know I will love or punt over £200 on a system just to play Zelda (nothing else at launch vaguely interests me) with a potentially broken control scheme. So if I can be a late adopter when SMG or Fire Emblem comes out so much the better. By that time I hope Nintendo will have proven to me that I can have more fun with a Wii controller. But at the moment I don't happen to think shaking my wrist to do sword attacks is more immersive - especially since it is merely replacing mashing the B button. It's not like Link will copy my movements onscreen, he'll just run through his sword attacks. Couldn't care less about widescreen either since I don't play on a widescreen TV. I'm sure it'll be a great game on both systems but there's a good chance that a Cube Zelda ported to Wii will not be as good as a Wii Zelda built from scratch.

I think you're being harsh there: http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/714/714008p1.html Everything else in that list has made day 1. /back on topic. If there's a GC Zelda TP I will buy that - no question.