Topic: Bionic Commando: Rearmed Devs Resurface

[Stratos]

Yeah, somebody find me an article that shows GRiN saying they hate the Wii.

Unless somebody can show me that, it's just more Vocal Minority Whining.

But the cool kids say I have to drive a VMW to be cool like them...

/lame pun humor

[D_Average]

No proof is needed!  It has been reported by someone who knows this guy that GRIN made derogatory statements towards the Wii under the breath.  Seize them!!

[KDR_11k]

So apparently there's another dev that was formed from former GRINmates called Fat Shark, they made Lead and Gold recently and are now working on ReArmed 2.

[Ian Sane]

If you are gonna re-make a franchise, for nostalgia reasons, and market it to the current generation of gamers on current generation of consoles, you'd think you might want to include the console audience that the game originally appeared on.

This makes sense in theory but I think that's how it works.  A lot of franchises associated with Nintendo systems moved to the Playstation during the 32/64 bit era and from then on were no longer associated with Nintendo systems.  Though Bionic Commando wasn't exactly an active franchise so that doesn't really work with this example.
 
Still it isn't like the same audience stuck with Nintendo the whole time and that every new player in the consoles wars attracts a new audience.  What I would call the general console gamer audience bounces around.  They went from Nintendo to Sony and now would likely own an Xbox 360.  It is only Nintendo fans that have stuck with Nintendo consoles this whole time.  The general console gamer follows the games and thus follows third party support.  Capcom also makes the HD consoles their main platform so one could assume that Bionic Commando fans would have followed Capcom over the years.

[Urkel]

Yeah, somebody find me an article that shows GRiN saying they hate the Wii.

Unless somebody can show me that, it's just more Vocal Minority Whining.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/episode-49-invisible-walls/46982
 
Peter Wanat, producer of Wanted: Weapons of Fate, goes on a batshit insane anti-Wii rant. He compares the power of the Wii to the Genesis, among other things.
 
But no, no, you guys are right. Nobody in the industry has an irrational hatred of the Wii.

[Peachylala]

Is he having a temper tantrum...?

[NWR_insanolord]

Yeah, somebody find me an article that shows GRiN saying they hate the Wii.

Unless somebody can show me that, it's just more Vocal Minority Whining.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/episode-49-invisible-walls/46982
 
Peter Wanat, producer of Wanted: Weapons of Fate, goes on a batshit insane anti-Wii rant. He compares the power of the Wii to the Genesis, among other things.
 
But no, no, you guys are right. Nobody in the industry has an irrational hatred of the Wii.

I would never claim that there aren't people in the industry who hate the Wii; I just wouldn't jump to the conclusion that every single developer who doesn't exclusively support Nintendo hates the Wii.

[Peachylala]

"Hate" is a strong word. I agree with your statement, but most of these developers, when it comes to Wii mind you, seem to automatically talk out of their ass and not only insult us, the audience, but basically turn away would be customers.

Instead of "hate", I call it "Overstuffed Egos".

Or "Pride".

[Mop it up]

I think it is more like "indifference," it seems most developers simply aren't interested in creating Wii games. It's usually publishers who end up sounding condescending because they're the ones who have to come up with excuses for the Wii not getting certain games and such.

[D_Average]

You can't fault developers for having a preference.  It like getting made at Van Halen for ignoring rap.  Let the artist do, what the artist wants to do.

[UncleBob]

But then it's okay to laugh when Van Halen goes bankrupt and rap music sales are up 2,000%, right?

[NWR_insanolord]

I don't get why you're upset at the developer. With very few exceptions, these decisions are made by the publisher; the developer has little to no say in it.

[KDR_11k]

You can't fault developers for having a preference.  It like getting made at Van Halen for ignoring rap.  Let the artist do, what the artist wants to do.

More like ignoring CDs because they lack the "warm" sound of vinyls.

[Mop it up]

I don't get why you're upset at the developer. With very few exceptions, these decisions are made by the publisher; the developer has little to no say in it.

That's another reason the Wii ends up with so many poor-quality games, because the developers are forced to make products they have no passion for.

[KDR_11k]

You'd think all that whining about a lack of innovation in big name titles would translate to passion for making a Wii game but instead it seems they're now only caring about story anymore and forgetting that all their games play the same.

[UncleBob]

I don't get why you're upset at the developer. With very few exceptions, these decisions are made by the publisher; the developer has little to no say in it.

I don't think anyone /hates/ the developer.
It's just amusing that they fail to support the current market leader in any form (console or handheld), then their company fails.  Everyone else is all "boo-hoo" - yet there's some of us who can just look at this situation and say "Duh."

[Ian Sane]

I think it is more like "indifference," it seems most developers simply aren't interested in creating Wii games.

Agreed.  They're just not interested in what the Wii offers them as a developer.  All it offers is the remote.  If you don't want to make a motion controlled game the Wii is just not going to be that enticing for a developer compared to the other consoles.
 
I don't think publishers hate the Wii either, they're just dumb jackasses.  They saw that the Wii was popular with casuals and typecast the Wii as such.  None of their really talented devs want to make casual stuff so it all sucks.  And the sucky stuff doesn't sell and they're all "uh, what?"
 
The attitude of the publishers also affects the devs.  If you make a PS360 game you can potentially make the game you want to make.  You make a Wii game and you're going to be told it's for this audience or that audience and that it should use this controller and you just think "eh, **** it".  I get the feeling that no publisher just lets you make the Wii game you want.  It has to be for the "Wii audience" so you get tons of corporate interference.

[NWR_Lindy]

But if GRiN had made a Wii game, you know what it would be? Just Dance Rearmed.

Watch what you wish for.

[UncleBob]

But if GRiN had made a Wii game, you know what it would be? Just Dance Rearmed.

Watch what you wish for.

Probably wouldn't have gone bankrupt then...

[NWR_Lindy]

Probably wouldn't have gone bankrupt then...

Yeah.  How depressing is that?

[UncleBob]

Probably wouldn't have gone bankrupt then...

Yeah.  How depressing is that?

Not at all, really.
I'm willing to bet all you folks talking bad about Just Dance both:

1) never played it and are basing your opinion on review scores more than anything

2) have very much enjoyed a Nintendo game that's gotten similarly bad scores

[Mop it up]

2) have very much enjoyed a Nintendo game that's gotten similarly bad scores

Yeah, like Mario Kart 64. It got a 6.4 from GameSpot.

[Peachylala]

2) have very much enjoyed a Nintendo game that's gotten similarly bad scores

Yeah, like Mario Kart 64. It got a 6.4 from GameSpot.

Let's also not forget how Game Informer review Paper Mario 2.

[Stratos]

2) have very much enjoyed a Nintendo game that's gotten similarly bad scores

Yeah, like Mario Kart 64. It got a 6.4 from GameSpot.

Let's also not forget how Game Informer review Paper Mario 2.

If thats the review I'm thinking of, then I refuse to acknowledge it as such. It is a poorly written preview. Didn't they make the review almost a year before the game came out or something?

[TJ Spyke]

No, but the reviewers admitted that they based their scores on what they thought the readers would rate it. I guess no one told them that the whole point of a review is for the reviewer to give us their opinion, not try and guess what the reader thinks. Here is what they wrote on their official forum after the controversy (and what took away ay credibility the two reviewers had, and hurt the credibility of the magazine's editor-in-chief):

"GI-Jeremy wrote:

Lisa and I both knew that our Paper Mario scores were going to cause controversy. Yes, we know that many people out there will love it. We also know that it is a well-made game. However, it also WILL NOT appeal to many people - I would safely say that more people will dislike it than like it. Why? Like we said in the review, it's a very kiddie game - it's target audience is clearly young gamers - I would say 10 and under. For that reason, we had to score it low. Remember, we aren't scoring games strictly on our personal opinions, we're also scoring them based on how much we think THE GAMING PUBLIC will like them.[/i] We've all played games that we personally disliked and scored them well because we've known that most people will like them, and we've also scored games low that we love, because most people won't enjoy them.

For example, I really like the bizarre frog golf game Ribbit King, and I gave it a 7, because it's just not for everyone. Paper Mario 2 also scored low because it's just not for everyone. If you think it's a 10 in your book, it's a ten in your book, and that doesn't change if we disagree. We're here to guide you on what games to pick up, but ultimately your personal opinion is what will make you buy a game or not.

I hope this helps."