Author Topic: The NWR Mailbag Talkback Thread (Read 51077 times)

vudu · « **Reply #25 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:44:36 AM »

I pay sales tax in Illinois for my online Wii Points purchases. It sucks.

Pale · « **Reply #26 on:** January 23, 2007, 05:59:18 AM »

Man, I have no idea what is in Illinois.

Blue Plant · « **Reply #27 on:** January 23, 2007, 06:03:00 AM »

Bought 1,000 points via the Shop Channel last night for 10.00 flat here in Florida.

UltimatePartyBear · « **Reply #28 on:** January 23, 2007, 06:56:05 AM »

Well, Chicago is in Illinois, and it's a major Internet backbone hub, so if my WiiConnect24 server theory is accurate, that could be the reason. I'd wager that Nintendo has servers in at least four major Internet hubs across the U.S. to minimize the number of hops from any given Wii to a WC24 server. The data on the servers (VC downloads, software updates, weather and news data) can be propagated from the main servers at intervals, and then when all the Wii owners go to download Zelda, the load is distributed across the country. Seattle is close to NOA and a good hub for the West Coast, Chicago is ideal for serving the Midwest, DFW is good for the West and part of the South, and there could be one or two to cover the rest of the country (probably Atlanta and DC).

Of course, I don't know for a fact that Nintendo has servers spread across the country (although I think it's likely), nor do I know whether maintaining servers there is enough to require them to collect sales tax. It would make sense to me, because the transaction could be argued to take place entirely within the state's borders.

Smoke39 · « **Reply #29 on:** January 28, 2007, 07:27:29 PM »

How come so many letters sent to the bag have questions punctuated with periods instead of question marks?

KnowsNothing · « **Reply #30 on:** January 28, 2007, 10:56:49 PM »

I tried out Wii Media Center X the other day, and it sucks. Well, it's not that it sucks, it's just early on in development and can't really play anything. And they never really tell you that until you've tried it.

Right now there is no music playback at all, and you can only play flash (flv) movies. So, uhh, have fun with that.

Crimm · « **Reply #31 on:** February 04, 2007, 07:33:11 PM »

HAHA! From the looks of the new mailbag it would seem that TYP has a fan.

TheYoungerPlumber · « **Reply #32 on:** February 04, 2007, 07:49:36 PM »

I suspect he submitted his entry without providing a name. Of course, the form yelled at him for not providing a nickname so he cursed me.

TJ Spyke · « **Reply #33 on:** February 05, 2007, 06:39:11 AM »

To the e-mailer complaining about the AIAS, I don't like them either but this guy doesn't know what he is talking about. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (and the ones for TV and radio) also require companies to pay to be members (and receive services). It's to help pay for services since the AIAS is a non-profit organization. Other similar organizations like the Screen Actors Guild/Writers Guild/Directors Guild/etc. also require membership dues. I think the AIAS only requires a $1,000 fee as well.

Besides, I care more about the awards given by the people at the Game Developers Conference.

Chode2234 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 06, 2007, 10:56:09 AM »

I think Zelda TP did define the gamecube. It was a direct response to the criticism of wind waker and the Gamecube philosophy (n64 carry over on some accounts). It was Nintendo saying "please come back" and it was an important moment in the history of the gamecube. The very fact that it was ported over to the Wii solidifies the image of the gamecube that I have: A great system that never could get out from under its own weight. A capable and almost perfect system that never lived up to its potential.

I loved my gamecube (till I sold it to pay for my wii), but the fact that Zelda was released a year later and on the Wii is very significant in understanding the Gamecube.

Smoke39 · « **Reply #35 on:** February 06, 2007, 12:12:19 PM »

Not to mention the 'Cube version is superior. ;b

Alfonse · « **Reply #36 on:** February 07, 2007, 02:08:58 PM »

I consider snubbing Twilight Princess just because it happened to be a Wii launch game too to be equally arbitrary.

It is well known that the Wii version is significantly different from the GC one. Besides the control scheme (which tends to favor ranged weapons over melee combat), the world itself is actually reversed. So that world that is supposed to harken back to OoT in its geography doesn't (though when flipped, it does resemble LttP).

Furthermore, Twilight Princess belongs to the GameCube as much if not more than Wii because Wii is a GameCube. It may be a "pimped" GC, but the beating heart of it is still a GC. It was born a GC game, forged in the earliest tech demos for GC. It was the Zelda game Nintendo promised us over 5 years ago, and they promised it to us on GC. It didn't take much advantage of the "pimped" nature of the hardware, as texture diversity and quality were not improved.

Lastly, there's this fact. When it's all said and done about Wii, Twilight Princess won't deserve a mention there either. Because there's going to be another Zelda game, built for Wii from the ground up around that controller. And it's going to make TP-Wii look like a relic controller-wise. It will define Wii, as much as MP3 or Mario Galaxy. So too much of a Wii game to be a GC definitive, too much of a GC game to be a Wii definitive. So what, it gets lost between the cracks just because it happened to release at the wrong time?

Quote

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (and the ones for TV and radio) also require companies to pay to be members (and receive services).

First, the Academy doesn't require that a movie's production company be a member in order to win an Academy award. That was the point I was making; that to even be considered for an award, you have to pay money.

Consider that if Tetris had been developed as an indie game and created a revolution akin to when it was released. AIAS wouldn't be able to give it an award because the developer isn't a member. Whereas the motion picture Academy can give awards to those who aren't members.

Second, the Academy actually does something besides host awards. Outside of the DICE Summit (which is not much), the AIAS does precious little besides give out awards to members.

Quote

Other similar organizations like the Screen Actors Guild/Writers Guild/Directors Guild/etc. also require membership dues.

Those are more like unions than the AIAS. Your membership dues actually go to fund something.

Shecky · « **Reply #37 on:** February 11, 2007, 03:45:41 PM »

I finally downloaded LoZ:LttP and have no issue with control on the GCN controller so far.

TJ Spyke · « **Reply #38 on:** February 11, 2007, 05:19:10 PM »

Why do some people continue thinking that Rare/Microsoft have ANY say in GoldenEye 007? The only people who have any say are:

MGM (owners of the Bond franchise)
Activision (current holders of the license)
Nintendo (holders of the license when they published GE, Rare had no more control than Spike does in Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2 or Bizarre Creations do with the Project Gotham Racing games)

Nintendo would just have to work out a deal with MGM, and maybe Activision.

Djunknown · « **Reply #39 on:** February 12, 2007, 01:20:10 PM »

Concerning Mario Kart 64, the only real complaint I have is that I can't switch from Speedometer to the Map on the fly.You can always switch perspective from the start position.

But it does raise a point about other N64 games. Zelda Oot and MM work without problems (Mario 64 as well), but can anyone think of a N64 title where the 'Cube/Classic Controller won't cut it?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #40 on:** February 18, 2007, 08:38:53 PM »

Isn't it rating inflation to have a whole range (0-5) of ratings that all mean "this sucks, don't bother"? I could understand two ratings, bad and atrocious but more differentiation than that isn't necessary.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #41 on:** February 18, 2007, 08:54:15 PM »

Wait a second, why can't a patch be released for a Wii game? Patches don't have to be behemoths so they should save on the flash memory without much trouble (Or if worse comes to worse use the freaken SD CARD)

Podings · « **Reply #42 on:** February 18, 2007, 09:35:37 PM »

What, no-body's told Wolfen 359 yet, that the shield on the Z-button in Smash Bros. Melee is not the same shield as the one on L and R? It wasn't in the reply, so I assumed it'd be first I'd find in the talkback.

Anyway, goes like this: The shield on the Z-button is more reminiscent of the shield from the original Smash Bros.; it comes up after a grab-attempt, and decreases in size particularly slower than the L and R shield. It is, however, also less durable., suggesting that it is meant primarily for protection after a fumbled grab-attempt, of which there are quite many, compared to the first game, where grabs and throws played a much bigger role.

UncleBob · « **Reply #43 on:** February 19, 2007, 01:53:57 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: LassePalle
A score of 4.5 means that the game is slightly below average.

Quote
Originally posted by: MailBag
It just so happens that when taking the average score of games from the major gaming magazines and websites, the figure comes out to be somewhere in the low 7.0 range.

If 7.0 is average, IMHO, 4.5 isn't anywhere near slightly below average... ?

WindyMan · « **Reply #44 on:** February 19, 2007, 05:34:35 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
Quote
Originally posted by: LassePalle
A score of 4.5 means that the game is slightly below average.

Quote
Originally posted by: MailBag
It just so happens that when taking the average score of games from the major gaming magazines and websites, the figure comes out to be somewhere in the low 7.0 range.

If 7.0 is average, IMHO, 4.5 isn't anywhere near slightly below average... ?

There are some inconsistencies in lingo that the staff uses, which will be addressed in the future. Sorry for the confusion there.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #45 on:** February 19, 2007, 05:53:10 AM »

Why say 5 is the average game when by any means it's not the average? How do you define an average game if not by averaging all games? Some kind of quality that you feel is half way between Charlie's Angels and Metroid Prime? If all (relevant) games rate higher than 5.0, shouldn't the average rating be there so you have the most room to rate the games people care about? If you don't want that many numbers because you think there's no way to tell whether something is a 93% or 94% game, why not simply cut the numbers? Give some rating system where zero is 7.0, better games get positive numbers and worse ones negative numbers?

WindyMan · « **Reply #46 on:** February 19, 2007, 06:50:13 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Why say 5 is the average game when by any means it's not the average? How do you define an average game if not by averaging all games? Some kind of quality that you feel is half way between Charlie's Angels and Metroid Prime? If all (relevant) games rate higher than 5.0, shouldn't the average rating be there so you have the most room to rate the games people care about? If you don't want that many numbers because you think there's no way to tell whether something is a 93% or 94% game, why not simply cut the numbers? Give some rating system where zero is 7.0, better games get positive numbers and worse ones negative numbers?

The 1-10 score scale is fixed. 1 is the low end of the bad side of the scale. 5 is the midpoint, where the good and bad sides of the scale meet. 10 is the high end of the good side of the scale. Just because most games score in the higher side of the scale doesn't mean the scale should be readjusted. It means that developers are making decent games most of the time. Wouldn't you agree with that?

A game should not be looked down upon because its review score happens to fall below the average. Calling a game "below average" is a misnomer*. What if the average score for a genre is in the high 8.0 range? 7.5 would be a score less than the average score in that category, and although that's a good score, it's looked upon unfavorably due to its being "below average." That's not kosher.

It's funny how people complain that review scores are too high. (KDR, this isn't directed toward you specifically.) Go to any site with reader reviews, like IGN or GameSpot. Compare the average reader review score with the score given by the site. Guess what? 100% of the time, the reader score is higher than the site score. If most people think the review score scale is set too high, why don't the people who review games with their own scale generally agree? It's because they want to make the scale fit with their own personal view of whether or not a game is worth buying.

The problem is, they've already bought the game. Therefore, the tendency is to rate it a higher score than what it really deserves. Here's a good example. GameSpot gave Avatar Wii a 5.6. Their readers gave it a 7.4. (We gave it a 6.0.) Do people want to admit they bought a 5.6~6.0 game for $50? Nope. They bump up their score a point or two to justify the purchase to themselves. What other reason would reader review scores be higher, without fail?

This is why basing review scores off of the average is incorrect. Because the average of all review scores is always in flux, and the perceived value of average by people who read reviews is inconsistent, using it as a baseline for all other review scores doesn't make a lick of sense. You can't base a review score off of a moving middle point. Just like you can't pitch a tent in quicksand.

*(If this sounds hypocritical, understand that we are addressing this point internally.)

vudu · « **Reply #47 on:** February 19, 2007, 07:52:18 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: WindyMan
Go to any site with reader reviews, like IGN or GameSpot. Compare the average reader review score with the score given by the site. Guess what? 100% of the time, the reader score is higher than the site score.

O RLY?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #48 on:** February 19, 2007, 08:09:53 AM »

Reader scores are usually because of votes, I don't trust those because most people will just vote 0-1 or 10 even if they haven't played the game just because of the way they're currently hyped. Reader scores rarely go to 9.0 or higher for that same reason, someone will always vote 0 and if it's just fanboys of another system.

vudu · « **Reply #49 on:** February 19, 2007, 08:32:12 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Reader scores rarely go to 9.0 or higher for that same reason, someone will always vote 0 and if it's just fanboys of another system.

By jove! He's right!

Twilight Princess Wii
Twilight Princess GCN

News:

Author Topic: The NWR Mailbag Talkback Thread (Read 51077 times)