Topic: Free Radical says no to Wii

[Requiem]

What are you talking about? No one has said anything like that except for Strelll....

[Bartman3010]

To me, Timesplitters 3 (Future Perfect) had better controls than the second one.

Anyway, seemed obvious with Haze, but the Time Splitter series might do well under the Wii or something...

[Strell]

Hmph.

All I'm saying is get ready to hear this a lot, Nintendo.  Stupid bitch arrogant teams talking about how their "new engine is so awesome, it can render children in real time," and use that as an excuse to not develop for the Wii.

'Course, Sony is going to hear the same thing from smaller devs, only on the subject of money.

If you're not going to bother with making a game for the Wii because you're an idiot (Mark Rein) or some else equally as idiotic (horse power! HURRR!!!), then I just don't care.  I'd rather have a small company like Nibris trying to do something partially new than hearing about how one of the 1000 new FPS game engines is too intense for the Wii, despite the fact that they all do the same thing.

I already said in previous posts that the more devs, the better.  Even if they are truly crappy ones like Midway.  So while I'd actually rather have FR around, if they are going to act like children, then forget it.  

I mean, if you can't put 2 and 2 toghether and find that the Wiimote is the best damn thing for FPS games, there's simply something loose in your head.

[Requiem]

Well, I don't think Free Radical meant any disrespect. In fact, I bet they will mak a TP or something similar for the Wii after Haze. Especially since Future Perfect featured a weapon that would be PERFECT for the Wii. (the cyber-grappling hook thing).

[couchmonkey]

That sucks, but I'm sure we'll see another game (probably Timesplitters) from Free Radical on Wii eventually.  It doesn't sound like Free Radical has a problem with Wii, just like this particular game may not work the way they want it to on Wii.

[Requiem]

Check it out

Time Splitters, or some other game, seems very probable now (if it hadn't before).

[vudu]

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem
TP is one of my favorite FPS series.

However, Haze doesn't look like TP at all....(I like Free Radical's art style -- especially those DeerMen!)

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem
Well, I don't think Free Radical meant any disrespect. In fact, I bet they will mak a TP or something similar for the Wii after Haze. Especially since Future Perfect featured a weapon that would be PERFECT for the Wii. (the cyber-grappling hook thing).

What the heck is TP?  At first I thought it was a typo and you meant TS, but you keep doing it.  

[ShyGuy]

Twilight Princess, duh  

[vudu]

I assume that's sarcasm; Twilight Princess isn't a FPS series.

[ShyGuy]

But it IS a 3rd person shooter.

[ruby_onix]

The problem here is that Free Radical (among many others) has moved on to making next-gen games, and Nintendo didn't make a next-gen console (instead making an enhanced current-gen console, and giving it a "new-gen" copout excuse).

And Free Radical isn't making GameCube games anymore, because Iwata told developers that it was pointless a couple years ago.

[vudu]

Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
But it IS a 3rd person shooter.

But it's not a series, smart ass.  

[UltimatePartyBear]

I just noticed Link holds his bow gangsta style, just like the player holds the remote.

[Infernal Monkey]

Or the player is a sad goon hoping to look as cool as Link.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
The problem here is that Free Radical (among many others) has bought into the idea that next-gen is only higher rez, more special effects, more rag-doll physics, and Nintendo didn't make a console that catered to expensive blockbuster glitz-is-everything thinking(instead making a mass-market, realistically priced console, and giving it a "new-gen" input method so developers couldn't make unninovative sequel bash number XXX and then use a copout excuse).

Your welcome!

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
The problem here is that Free Radical (among many others) has bought into the idea that next-gen is only higher rez, more special effects, more rag-doll physics, and Nintendo didn't make a console that catered to expensive blockbuster glitz-is-everything thinking(instead making a mass-market, realistically priced console, and giving it a "new-gen" input method so developers couldn't make unninovative sequel bash number XXX and then use a copout excuse).

Your welcome!

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Lol that is great. Personally I find the Wii to be the most next generation console of the bunch since it is truly a step up when it comes to interacting with games not relying on graphical horsepower which is basically an evolution of gaming.  

[nemo_83]

This all comes down to the one console wolrd.  The majority of people out there are going to buy one console and only that brand based on the assumption of superiority.  Nintendo fanbois will say Wii is superior because of the controller and the system being bargain bin priced.  MS fans will say LIVE rules the world (if the world does not include Japan) and it has PS3 quality visuals for two hundred dollars less.  Sony fans will rave about blu ray which doesn't affect gameplay and their graphics which MS has for less costs.  

The truth is there is no console that is superior.  Nintendo has the next gen interface.  MS has next gen visuals and online games.  Sony has next gen visuals and the controller that should have been five years ago.  There is no total package.  Nintendo doesn't have games online at launch, Nintendo doesn't have next gen visuals, MS has an archaic complicated controller, Sony's driving away developers with costs, etc.  It is coming down to consumer biases right now.  Some are going to judge superiority by graphics, some will say it is all about gameplay, and the gamers who are not biased are going to feel jaded as usual because they have to buy a 360 and a Wii to get everything they want (Zelda and Halo) and they will begin to want them to be one system.

[ruby_onix]

Next gen consoles are supposed to have a nearly-exponential increase in power. How they want to use that power is up to the devs. If ragdoll physics are their thing, then good for them.

Power costs money, but every year there's a new "sweet spot" where you get the most bang for your buck. I think Microsoft may have hit that point (graphically speaking) with the 360. But then they wasted some money by pushing it a little further so you could do those same things in HD (which they made manditory). I think Sony likely went too far with the PS3.

I think that Nintendo, coming in one year later and not adopting HD (although I still think it should be an option), should've been able to match MS's output at a significantly lower price, but by most accounts (even from Nintendo) it's not even in the same ballpark. They've aimed much lower than the sweet spot, and we don't even know if Nintendo's going to pass those savings they squeezed out of it down to us. A GameCube with 2x the CPU speed and 2x the RAM at 2x the price is not a deal. If it's $99, then yes, I'll be amazed. But nobody's predicting that, not even here.


You mentioned on page 1 that there are inherent tradeoffs in buying only one console. That we won't get MGS4 or FFXIII. We didn't get MGS2 and 3 because Konami didn't want to give them. We didn't get FFX and XII because Square didn't want to give them. The Wii is supposed to be all about changing people's minds about Nintendo, but even if they do change people's minds, we still won't get FF and MGS (in their current forms) because the Wii is incapable of accepting them. That's something that's not inherent to creativity or to Nintendo (N64 cartridge blunder aside).

[Ceric]

If their is a will there is a way.  If enough people want the current style of FF on Wii it will be there.  We've all seen some amazing things done when demand is their.  I wouldn't call it incapable.  I just would say its more challenging then it should be.  I'll leave it at that.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
Next gen consoles are supposed to have a nearly-exponential increase in power. How they want to use that power is up to the devs. If ragdoll physics are their thing, then good for them.

Power costs money, but every year there's a new "sweet spot" where you get the most bang for your buck. I think Microsoft may have hit that point (graphically speaking) with the 360. But then they wasted some money by pushing it a little further so you could do those same things in HD (which they made manditory). I think Sony likely went too far with the PS3.

I think that Nintendo, coming in one year later and not adopting HD (although I still think it should be an option), should've been able to match MS's output at a significantly lower price, but by most accounts (even from Nintendo) it's not even in the same ballpark. They've aimed much lower than the sweet spot, and we don't even know if Nintendo's going to pass those savings they squeezed out of it down to us. A GameCube with 2x the CPU speed and 2x the RAM at 2x the price is not a deal. If it's $99, then yes, I'll be amazed. But nobody's predicting that, not even here.


You mentioned on page 1 that there are inherent tradeoffs in buying only one console. That we won't get MGS4 or FFXIII. We didn't get MGS2 and 3 because Konami didn't want to give them. We didn't get FFX and XII because Square didn't want to give them. The Wii is supposed to be all about changing people's minds about Nintendo, but even if they do change people's minds, we still won't get FF and MGS (in their current forms) because the Wii is incapable of accepting them. That's something that's not inherent to creativity or to Nintendo (N64 cartridge blunder aside).

Gee I remember a time when next generation was determined more so by the games rather than the visual oomph a system has. Wii is the most "next" generation system because not only has it gotten a graphical increase, but it has also included a new way of interacting with games.  Anyone can throw a bunch of graphical horsepower into a system, that isn't "next" anything, but a basic evolution of gaming. Now a new way of interacting with games in addition to a graphical boost is indeed next generation (something I felt this last generation lacked).

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
You mentioned on page 1 that there are inherent tradeoffs in buying only one console. That we won't get MGS4 or FFXIII. We didn't get MGS2 and 3 because Konami didn't want to give them. We didn't get FFX and XII because Square didn't want to give them. The Wii is supposed to be all about changing people's minds about Nintendo, but even if they do change people's minds, we still won't get FF and MGS (in their current forms) because the Wii is incapable of accepting them. That's something that's not inherent to creativity or to Nintendo (N64 cartridge blunder aside).

That's a trade-off too. A single-console buyer will be asking themselves: which game? Wii Tennis or Haze? With the collected versions of Nintendogs tracking ahead of Halo numbers in the US, Nintendo is betting the former.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com  

[Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem
TP is one of my favorite FPS series.

However, Haze doesn't look like TP at all....(I like Free Radical's art style -- especially those DeerMen!)

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem
Well, I don't think Free Radical meant any disrespect. In fact, I bet they will mak a TP or something similar for the Wii after Haze. Especially since Future Perfect featured a weapon that would be PERFECT for the Wii. (the cyber-grappling hook thing).

What the heck is TP?  At first I thought it was a typo and you meant TS, but you keep doing it.

Sorry, mate. It's a habit I formed ever since TP was announced. But it ain't me fault, we been talkin' Zelda for too long!

[Strell]

I love how everytime the price of the Wii is brought up, about how it doesn't match the graphical quality of the Xbox 360.

Newsflash you (internets) idiots (generally speaking), the cost is coming from the Wiimote.

I have no idea how that has
seemingly.
escaped.
every.
last.
person.
on.
the.
internets.

"It costs 200 and hardly looks better than the GC."  So f*cking what.  We're paying for the interface on the premise that it makes games better to play, and frankly I'd rather get a cheaper console that gives me that than getting an Xbox 1.5 or a PS2 1.5.

This might be because I have this crazy notion that I like how my games play, not how they look.



 

[IceCold]

Quote
I'm calling it now , the first developer to make a -good- FPS for Wii that's online enabled and has good multiplayer has an instant million seller on their hands.

Thanks, Mario. I bet it took you weeks to figure that out..

Quote

Quote
Twilight Princess, duh

I assume that's sarcasm

No, really? It couldn't be!

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
The problem here is that Free Radical (among many others) has bought into the idea that next-gen is only higher rez, more special effects, more rag-doll physics, and Nintendo didn't make a console that catered to expensive blockbuster glitz-is-everything thinking(instead making a mass-market, realistically priced console, and giving it a "new-gen" input method so developers couldn't make unninovative sequel bash number XXX and then use a copout excuse).

Your welcome!

Ah. You killed it with the wrong spelling of you're...  

[Requiem]

I say BOO to Icecold for pointing it out!