Topic: "Wii U Can Handle Crysis 3 (And Almost Did), Says Crytek Head" -Kotaku

[broodwars]

Rayman: While not a particularly bad game, that version of the game is the worst of the home consoles.

Had to reference this one... Metacritic would seem to disagree:
PC 86
3DS 71
360 87
PS3 87
Vita 88
Wii 92

And I feel obligated to point out the following (only using the console data):

360 - based on 55 reviews
PS3 - based on 43 reviews
Wii - based on 13 reviews

Yeah, it's easier to get a higher overall score when only 13 recorded critics (over 3 times less than the other versions) gave enough of a damn about the Wii version of the game to review it.

[Oblivion]

Rayman: While not a particularly bad game, that version of the game is the worst of the home consoles.

Had to reference this one... Metacritic would seem to disagree:
PC 86
3DS 71
360 87
PS3 87
Vita 88
Wii 92

And I feel obligated to point out the following (only using the console data):

360 - based on 55 reviews
PS3 - based on 43 reviews
Wii - based on 13 reviews

Yeah, it's easier to get a higher overall score when only 13 recorded critics (over 3 times less than the other versions) gave enough of a damn about the Wii version of the game to review it.

LOL

[UncleBob]

Well, I asked why you consider them ****ty.  You then admitted that you haven't played most of them and based your opinion from looking stuff up online... so if that's allowed, I'd think I should be allowed to also look stuff up online, right?

And you realize that's an average score, right?

I mean, if the number of reviews makes it easier to get a higher score, shouldn't the PC version (which some quick research shows to virtually be the console version) have a higher score with the mere 11 reviews it has?

[Oblivion]

I admitted to not playing the LAST one. Jesus dude, pay the **** attention.


And dude, the lower number of reviews means the easier it is for the average score to be sided either way. Kind of like when the Rotten Tomatoes score for the last Twilight movie was 100% when it had less than ten reviews. Simple 6th grade math.


Come on.

[UncleBob]

GameFAQs Reviews:
Wii (5 reviews) - Average 9.4
360 (4 reviews) - Average 9.0
PS3 (3 reviews) - Average 9.0

Weird... the two games with the lowest scores also have the least amount of reviews.

[broodwars]

I mean, if the number of reviews makes it easier to get a higher score, shouldn't the PC version (which some quick research shows to virtually be the console version) have a higher score with the mere 11 reviews it has?

All things being equal with all reviewers having similar tastes, yes.  I was just pointing out that the lower your sampling size, the greater the impact an individual score has on the average.  Likewise, the greater the sampling size, the less impact an individual score has on the average.

I just don't think comparing scores between versions is an altogether fair comparison if the sampling size isn't roughly equal.  That's all I was saying.  You may now resume the pummeling.  : :

[UncleBob]

I admitted to not playing the LAST one. Jesus dude, pay the **** attention.

Maybe you should learn to properly answer questions.  I gave you an either/or and your answer did not specify which of those options.

[Oblivion]

You are a horrible debater. Like a 6th grader in his first debate class. You ignore parts of my post and you pick apart parts that are irrelevant and make it a main focus when you have been clearly beaten.

EDIT:

I admitted to not playing the LAST one. Jesus dude, pay the **** attention.

Maybe you should learn to properly answer questions.  I gave you an either/or and your answer did not specify which of those options.

Once again, picking apart irrelevant info You knew exactly what I meant to say. That I only looked up the last one.

[UncleBob]

You are a horrible debater. Like a 6th grader in his first debate class. You ignore parts of my post and you pick apart parts that are irrelevant and make it a main focus when you have been clearly beaten.

EDIT:

I admitted to not playing the LAST one. Jesus dude, pay the **** attention.

Maybe you should learn to properly answer questions.  I gave you an either/or and your answer did not specify which of those options.

Once again, picking apart irrelevant info You knew exactly what I meant to say. That I only looked up the last one.

I respond to what you say.  You respond with insults.  Sorry.

And, believe it or not, I don't know anything about your gaming habits and find it hard to believe that you played all of those games but one.  You must have far more free time than I do.

[Oblivion]

I am 18. I do have more free time than you do. Calling you a horrible debater is not an insult. It's a fact. You ignore what I s-you know what? I've already said it before. Not going to say it again.


You piss me off more than any other person I've even spoken to in my entire life.

[UncleBob]

I am 18. I do have more free time than you do.

You should consider playing games that you like in your free time.  Like, if you play the first Skylanders and think it's for kids, you probably shouldn't waste your time playing the second one.

Calling you a horrible debater is not an insult.

That's debatable, but...

Or in your case, Nintendo-Tinted glasses.

Like a 6th grader in his first debate class.

Simple 6th grade math.

Are pretty much all meant in an insulting manner and you know it.  Don't pretend otherwise.

Not going to say it again.

Promise?

You piss me off more than any other person I've even spoken to in my entire life.

Wow.  You've had a pretty sweet life if the worst you've ever had to deal with is some guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.  I had a guy harass me at work the other day wanting me to pay for the damage to his vehicle after he drove into a stop sign owned by the state of Illinois.  And that's just the most annoying person I've spoken with in the past five days.

[Oblivion]

You know what? **** it. I'm done with this thread.





You win. Nice strategy, pissing me off so much that I can't hope to argue back.

[UncleBob]

You know what? **** it. I'm done with this thread.

Promise?

[Oblivion]

[UncleBob]

You know what? **** it. I'm done with this thread.

Promise?

I guess not.

[alegoicoe]

Greatest reply ever!!

[Adrock]

I feel like this image is appropriate for many aspects of this thread.

[ejamer]

So, um, yeah.  Good to see everyone getting along.

...

With that said...
(image of a bunch of third party games)

Hey, look.  Third party games I bought on my Nintendo console.  Thanks, third parties!

The real problem I see with your image is that it's missing a ton of great games. Where is A Boy and His Blob, or Boom Blox, or Dawn of Discovery, or House of the Dead, or Little King's Story, or Fishing Resort, or Beatles Rock Band, or Disney Guilty Party, or Tatsunoko vs Capcom, or...  The list could go on for a while, covering a lot of games from different genres and publishers.


That said, I'm not judging. Your image also has 3-4 games that look great but I haven't picked up yet plus Skylanders, which looks decent but gets ignored because it's way out of my league with respect to pricing; yes, I would want to collect them all.


Saying it's ok to write off major publishing companies entirely because you only care about developers is disingenuous. It takes both sides to get a game released. Drop a publisher and you lose some good games for the system. Lose enough good games for the system and it becomes less attractive to the Average Joe consumer and ends up selling fewer units. Sell fewer units, and more publishers drop support further limiting the library. Etc etc, the pattern isn't hard to see.


I'm not saying that Nintendo needs to pander to third parties. I'm not saying that third parties are releasing good games on a consistent basis and should be supported blindly.  What I am saying: games need to be judged on their own merits on a case-by-case basis - not by some label on the outside of the box.




Also, is anyone else extremely disappointed that Rayman Origins on Wii had such a small number of reviews?  That game is friggin' awesome.

[UncleBob]

Saying it's ok to write off major publishing companies entirely because you only care about developers is disingenuous. It takes both sides to get a game released.

Thankfully, and this is one thing I do like about digital distribution, we're going to be reaching a time where this isn't true.

Drop a publisher and you lose some good games for the system. Lose enough good games for the system and it becomes less attractive to the Average Joe consumer and ends up selling fewer units. Sell fewer units, and more publishers drop support further limiting the library. Etc etc, the pattern isn't hard to see.

What?  That isn't the pattern I saw with the Wii.  It sold roughly seventy bazillion units and was the single most attractive system for "Average Joe" and publishers still dropped support.

What I am saying: games need to be judged on their own merits on a case-by-case basis - not by some label on the outside of the box.

To some extent, I agree.  Sure, my initial thoughts about a game are going to be tainted by the name on the label - but, if it's a good enough game, and something that interests me, then I'll get over it and buy the game.  But, if a company has a history of releasing games I don't care about, then, eventually, I'm going to just stop caring about them.  If they issued a press release that says "I'm no longer going to release games for your system of choice.", I wouldn't even bat an eye.

Also, is anyone else extremely disappointed that Rayman Origins on Wii had such a small number of reviews?  That game is friggin' awesome.

No, because it's the worst version of the game EVER and is therefore ****ty.

[ejamer]

...

Also, is anyone else extremely disappointed that Rayman Origins on Wii had such a small number of reviews?  That game is friggin' awesome.

No, because it's the worst version of the game EVER and is therefore ****ty.

Worst version of pure awesome is still awesome - especially when the only meaningful differences in the Wii version are SD graphics and superior control options.  Looks like we're going to have to disagree here.


(Also, wasn't the 3DS release the worst one?  Besides releasing much later than every other version for no clear reason, people complained heavily about the demo when it came out.)

[UncleBob]

Sorry... the sarcasm in my reply didn't translate well.

No, it's a great game.  Completely.  Which is why I still have plans to pick up Legends, whenever UBISoft decides us WiiU owners are worthy.

[Louieturkey]

And here I thought that was a fun debate with everyone smiling.  I see Kirby all happy next to Oblivion's name.  Then he got angry.  I don't like Kirby when he's angry because it looks like he's still smiling. 

It shouldn't matter who the publisher is.  It should matter if you want to play the game or not.

[Mop it up]

I have more third-party Wii and DS games than first-party. Though I don't think very many are from the larger publishers. The thing is, they haven't really released very many quality games on Nintendo platforms for a while now. The willingness to buy third-party products is there, it's the games that aren't.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v180/TheUncleBob/2013-03-04204530_zpsc614b0de.jpg

Why do you have two copies of Tron?

[UncleBob]

Why wouldn't I have two copies of TRON?

One's the regular edition that I got when the game came out.  The other is the TRU exclusive edition that I picked up cheap on sale at TRU.

[UncleBob]

And here I thought that was a fun debate with everyone smiling.

I was having fun.  I guess when the worst thing you have to deal with is some random dude on the internet who has a different taste in games than you, you just get angry over little things easier.

Dealing with $300 worth of fraudulent coupons today.  I wish video game arguments where the worst I had to deal with.