XBOX 720

[WhenKittensATK]

How many of those franchises you did not count and did not name are also first party? Also, is Metacritic really the best source? Looking at the high scores for the last 90 days I see Mass Effect 3 listed three times, each time with a 90+ score, except for user scores which are all lower than 4.9. Also, looking at the All Time high scores we find GTA IV listed twice at the top, then Super Mario Galaxy 1 and Super Mario Galaxy 2. They're even above Half Life 2!

I counted all the 90 and above Wii games and listed its exclusives, the list is very small. Didn't bother to count for 360/PS3, since their list is obviously bigger just by looking at it. I'm also sure they have more exclusives compared to the Wii's mere 4-5.

 

Metacritic shows double listing, because it overall the consoles. That's not a flaw in their listing, as games on different consoles can perform differently and they need different scores slots. As for why some "bad" game appear near the top, that's just a small discretion look at the rest of the list.

 

Stop making excuses. We all know the Wii lacks mature games. They also lack a variety of good games, as most of them are just Nintendo classic franchises.

 

Out of all the gamers I know, the only ones who own and play the Wii are the little kids. What games do they play? Little kid games ofc, Mario and all those 4 exclusives. If I looked at the titles I would see Mario like 5+ times.

Edited April 2, 2012 by AZNguyen

[Guest_Jim_*]

Okay, I'm going to put this as simply as I can to be sure you understand.

Your arguments are only invalid because you "didn't both to count" and just use "just by looking at it" as evidence.

A quality game is a quality game. Doesn't matter if it is mature or not. Duke Nukem Forever is practically the definition of a mature title and yet it is not a quality game. Just about every Mario game you seem content to call a kiddy game, but they are also quality games.

The value of a game is not the ESRB rating but the quality of the game, and so long as you think an "M" makes a title you will prove yourself to be a fool.

I want quality, not gore, as should most people.

[WhenKittensATK]

More excuses?

 

360 - 44 Titles (11 1st party games, 4 franchises)

PS3 - 40 Titles (13 1st party games, 7 franchises, hell that isn't even including all the other exclusive franchises under 90 rated games)

 

The ERSB ratings for those games vary, they aren't all M rated games. So you're idea of me being an M rated game whore is wrong. Once again it goes to show the lack of variety on the Wii. Quality is quality, so these other consoles still have more quality games either way.

[_TheAlexO]

With another platform coming with respectable technical specs (Wii U), looks like the PC will get even less attention

[Guest_Jim_*]

More excuses?

 

360 - 44 Titles (11 1st party games, 4 franchises)

PS3 - 40 Titles (13 1st party games, 7 franchises, hell that isn't even including all the other exclusive franchises under 90 rated games)

 

The ERSB ratings for those games vary, they aren't all M rated games. So you're idea of me being an M rated game whore is wrong. Once again it goes to show the lack of variety on the Wii. Quality is quality, so these other consoles still have more quality games either way.

If you're not obsessed with M rated games then why do you keep bringing up that some Nintendo titles are family friendly? Seriously, if it isn't important than why did you bring it up to begin with?

 

All children orientated games. Low cost and children friendly games = sales. More sales =/= to better.

 

Also, I find it very amusing that you implied to the Zelda and Metroid franchises as low cost. Of course, maybe you did not imply those games were low cost, in which case the argument I just quoted above is tangential to what I stated in the post before it.

 

Really the reason why there may be a lack of variety on the Wii compared to the 360 and PS3 is because Nintendo innovated in such a way that developers would have to put in more effort and money to bring their titles to the third of the three consoles. The 360 and PS3 controllers are identical to the point that programming for them is probably very, very similar. To write and test the additional code for the Wii Remote would take time and money most companies probably would not want to dedicate to such a purpose. After all, why spend more money to get the last console when you've already got two of the big three?

 

I find it interesting how you have completely ignored my comments from earlier about Kinect Animals, an obviously family oriented title is on the 360, and about Darksiders 2 and Metro Last Light which will be on the Wu (both at launch I believe). Of course this entire conversation was spawned from you comment that Mario games are not real games, even though Mario titles have defined the platformer genre, and that the 720 and PS4 will somehow bring "new" graphics while the Wu will not. Considering no official specs are known and no information about graphical capabilities are known, that statement is nothing but speculation. Besides, didn't Sony claim that the PS3's processors were going to make it the ultimate system for graphics? Every time I've seen any comparison between the 360 and PS3, there is no appreciable difference, so even hardware does not have to mean better graphics.

[CowKing]

Really the reason why there may be a lack of variety on the Wii compared to the 360 and PS3 is because Nintendo innovated in such a way that developers would have to put in more effort and money to bring their titles to the third of the three consoles. The 360 and PS3 controllers are identical to the point that programming for them is probably very, very similar. To write and test the additional code for the Wii Remote would take time and money most companies probably would not want to dedicate to such a purpose. After all, why spend more money to get the last console when you've already got two of the big three?

not. even. close.

[Guest_Jim_*]

not. even. close.

Really? You don't think that having to write and test code for a completely different controller would have impacted the decision? Or is your extremely vague argument that the 360 controller and PS3 controller are different enough to make coding different?

Sure one can argue the lesser graphics power would be an issue too, but looking at a number of titles available on the PC, developers have the ability to reduce graphics quality to fit hardware capabilities. Storage could also be an issue that would be harder to work around, since the Wii only has what, 512 MB internal.

[WhenKittensATK]

I bring up mature games, because the Wii lacks them. Variety?

 

I was referring to the "low cost" of the console and not the production costs of the games. You ask middle class parent, which of the consoles they would buy, they will pick the cheapest one.

 

The lack of Wii games isn't due to how innovative it is (LOL). Its due to its low end hardware. Last I remember it was basically a GameCube more or less. Which leads to the Wii U with upgraded performance and I already commented on that would help increase the variety of games as most popular games don't run on Wii hardware.

 

I ignored those 3 games because I already stated on that topic. I said with the upgrade of the Wii U performance, you would get more games. Not even sure why you're bringing up that Kinect game. I listed "popular games" then you tell me Kinect Animals, didn't deserve a response on either, but now you got it. I have no issues with family games on 360/PS3. LittleBigPlanet is one of the big exclusives for the PS3 and I own it. It just goes further to prove my point of 360/PS3 have variety and Wii only being mostly one type

 

Variety of Games (720/PS4) > Mario Games (Wii U), does that make it more clear?

 

The Wii U graphics have already been estimated to be up to par with current gen consoles. Unless they bust-a-move and want to increase their price point, which they probably won't do. Want to know why? For the little kids and their parents, because low-cost = more sales =/= better.

 

Uncharted 3 and Gears of War 3 are by far the best looking console games on their respective platform, perhaps you're looking at the wrong games.

 

With another platform coming with respectable technical specs (Wii U), looks like the PC will get even less attention

Rise of quality F2P games (League of Legends, World of Tanks, Hawken, Path of Exiles, Tribes Ascend, and etc). Studios still focusing on PC experience: ArenaNet, Valve, Blizzard, Wargaming, and etc. I don't see the PC getting any less attention than it does now. They seem to e getting more attention, but that might just be me.

Edited April 3, 2012 by AZNguyen

[Coors]

Rather than argue over which is "better" maybe just buy the console(s) that you like and don't buy the ones you don't. Who cares.

[Stonerboy779]

Party games the wii has them in abundance it the style of play that also makes a difference. It is still a popular console in that regard.

GOW3 Xbox only, Uncharted3 PS only and then Mario Nintento only. That's all fair right?

Nintendo has its game series and they have worked and still work their is no need for them to try and release combat games. The controller ain't friendly for competitive fps play but that's fine because you can make yourself look like a twat in front of friends while playing games that are fun due to their quality.

There is no need to take every game so seriously and just because something is all cartoony and simple to play doesn't make it a drag.

In fact a lot of complicated battle games are rather poor lacking on things like a quality story, easy controls, longevity of the game and it's ability to be socially played.

Too many games now on Xbox and PS are lacking split screen play which is one thing that made consoles great IMO. On the other hand nearly every title that comes to the Wii retains multiplayer/party play making it very social.

 

 

/rambling

[Guest_Jim_*]

I bring up mature games, because the Wii lacks them. Variety?

The inclusion or lack of gore and nudity does not constitute variety. At least not to me. New stories and mechanics creates variety.

 

I was referring to the "low cost" of the console and not the production costs of the games. You ask middle class parent, which of the consoles they would buy, they will pick the cheapest one.

Not necessarily. Some more than likely bought the PS3 for the Blu-Ray player, even though it was very expensive at launch. The middle class does not always have to be obsessed with the cheapest stuff after all.

 

The lack of Wii games isn't due to how innovative it is (LOL). Its due to its low end hardware. Last I remember it was basically a GameCube more or less. Which leads to the Wii U with upgraded performance and I already commented on that would help increase the variety of games as most popular games don't run on Wii hardware.

Pretty sure the comparisons at the time were saying the Wii was like two Gamecubes put together. (I believe that is what the Sega person said and caught heat for). Also, just because a developer does not put in the effort to get their game running on the Wii hardware does not mean the Wii hardware is incapable of running it, in one form or another.

 

I ignored those 3 games because I already stated on that topic. I said with the upgrade of the Wii U performance, you would get more games. Not even sure why you're bringing up that Kinect game. I listed "popular games" then you tell me Kinect Animals, didn't deserve a response on either, but now you got it.

I brought up that Kinect game because of you: No kiddy casual games here. You did not list any of that kind of game, so I provided proof that they do exist.

 

Variety of Games (720/PS4) > Mario Games (Wii U), does that make it more clear?

It's better.

 

The Wii U graphics have already been estimated to be up to par with current gen consoles. Unless they bust-a-move and want to increase their price point, which they probably won't do. Want to know why? For the little kids and their parents, because low-cost = more sales =/= better.

Estimated =/= actual.

 

Uncharted 3 and Gears of War 3 are by far the best looking console games on their respective platform, perhaps you're looking at the wrong games.

My point was about comparing 360 games and PS3 games. The PS3 supposedly has better hardware, but you wouldn't know it in several games.

 

Rather than argue over which is "better" maybe just buy the console(s) that you like and don't buy the ones you don't. Who cares.

+1

Actually, I might not even buy a console in this next generation and put the money into my PC.

 

And Stonerboy, The Conduit was a great FPS for the Wii. Haven't played the sequel, but the multiplayer of the first game was a lot of fun. Was only online MP though, not split-screen.

[Stonerboy779]

Not a fan of any of the wii fps games I have tried but love all the Mario and Zelda games

 

The MP for COD on Wii was horrible it was co op and the second player was just a second set of crosshairs. You would finally line someone up and if player one pans away you loose your shot

 

Mario Kart tho so much fun especially since far too many racing games on the cbox 360 now lack split screen multiplayer. Was ready to rage when neither grid or shift would play mp.