Jump to content

Nintendo Wii U


Cecilff2
 Share

Recommended Posts

NSMB - 25m

NSMB Wii - 22m

SMW - 21m

SML - 18m

SMB3 - 17m

SML2 - 11m

64 - 12m

Sunshine - 6m

Galaxy - 9m

Galaxy 2 - 6m (Which is pretty solid actually)

SMB2 - 7m

So SMB2 is the only game that disproves my point, and that's because it sucked.

Edited by RDX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah people should stop judging stuff by how much money it makes, then the world would realize Death Metal is the best and only worthwhile genre of music

Are we talking Arch Enemy, Scar Symmetry, Mercenary, In Flames (Jester Race Era) type death metal? If so, don't be a hater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NSMB and NSMB Wii are pretty lame games in comparison to smb3 or smw and they are on the top of that list. Their numbers are high because of the popularity of the ds/ wii and gaming is now mainstream. Mario 64 was amazing, anybody who says its terrible or a flop is definatly just wrong . The game is praised by the entire industry as a hallmark of gaming.

Also 12 million is not flop numbers

Edited by Crowbar Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WAIT HOLD UP

how much a game sold has never and will never really be a reliable indicator of how good it is

stop being an idiot

I never argued the better selling games were higher quality. Bam.

there. no need to be making some huge ass argument out of this. also nice job deleting your calvin and hobbes posts.

Edited by RDX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to point out that in my original post I made a point of telling you to pull your head out of your ass. And I wanted to keep it in the revised edit but it didn't really fit.

So, you know, I hope you take that into consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how much a game sold has never and will never really be a reliable indicator of how good it is

stop being an idiot

I never argued the better selling games were higher quality. Bam.

there. no need to be making some huge ass argument out of this. also nice job deleting your calvin and hobbes posts

1 2 3 4 I DECLARE A FLAME WAR!

The amount of nerd rage in this thread is just pure awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to point out that in my original post I made a point of telling you to pull your head out of your ass. And I wanted to keep it in the revised edit but it didn't really fit.

in my original post I said stop being an idiot

I decided that was pretty clear cut

so you know take that into consideration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So hey guys I'm still sorta waiting on someone to tell me how to objectively tell whether a game is good or not besides looking at either commercial or critical success (including non-official reviews, in the latter's case).

Please help I just don't know what to think anymore. :<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just happy for the possibility that Nintendo will come back from their shortcomings, I'm not suggesting that they have produced bad games, or bad systems, but with the Wii being thoroughly behind the other two gaming manufacturers in terms of power and online functionality, a new system may just be the spark that reignites Nintendo's flame. I'm not going to lie, the Wii sucks, and the only thing that influenced my purchase of the mundane system was the want to play Metroid Prime 3: Corruption and the anticipated loss of my Gamecube system, which began having lagging problems several months ago and is still in the lengthy process of dying. I've read several negative reviews of Metroid: Other M, but I still plan on playing it since I have never discovered a Metroid title I didn't like(except Metroid 1{thank you god for Zero Mission}) and I only hated that one due to the lack of certain staple features that became existent in the following sequels. I've also had lots of experience playing Brawl and I actually enjoy the game. It's definitely not as good as Melee(although certain characters play much better) and part of it seemed a lackluster copy of the previous game. The Wii does have it's strong points. I loved Super Mario Galaxy, it was probably the most fun I've had on the system(my dad bought his whenever it came out and I spent the rest of my Xmas holiday beating the game) and the inclusion of motion controlled gaming(the gimmick if you will) was a staple in a new direction of gaming. (Sony and Microsoft would not have come out with Move and Kinect if the motion aspect weren't a competitor.) It also gears the games to a different audience. Namely casual gamers who don't like the idea of sitting on the couch all day with a controller in their hand snacking on potato chips, eating pizza and drinking Coke, but would rather play a game that gets them doing some sort of physical activity. I would say I am more of a hardcore gamer, mainly retro gaming, but I even like the aspect of games that get you exercising, it's a different kind of fun. (albeit, DDR didn't premiere on the Wii, and that's the game I'm actually referring to >.<) But Nintendo has made a fortune off the casual market alone. I haven't played Donkey Kong Country Returns, but I plan to because I absolutely loved(and still own) the first three DKC games.

Another bone I have to pick with people who incessantly bitch about how bad Nintendo is are people who play the Zelda titles, then say they are exactly the same. Not entirely, I think the Zelda titles that were the closest in relation or being exactly alike were Zelda 1, Link to the Past, and Link's Awakening. Yes, the storyline is exactly the same, but the title of the game isn't plainly "Zelda." It's "The LEGEND of Zelda." Chronologically, many legends and myths evolve over time and take on many different forms. Each release of Zelda could be seen as a different re-telling of the Legend. And each game is different in some aspect. Zelda II was an RPG, Link to the Past returned to the same system that Zelda 1 used, but came up with more creative items, and had a much better story, and it even (albeit limited) featured the optional changes in the ordering of the castles, allowing you to choose a different path if you wanted to. Link's Awakening brought about a semi-platformer aspect with the ability to jump(not to mention I love the Mario cameos). Ocarina of Time was fully 3D, included lots of chances for exploration, added new races to the game(the Kokiri, the Goron's, and the Gerudo) had an excellent story, was fully functional, and also had the most castles out of any Zelda title(counting Ice Cavern and Within the Well,) Brought Zelda out of her shell and actually made her an integral character and guide, and allowed Link to time travel, giving you a look into his life, both past and future. Majora's mask was about the same, although I'll admit, having to actually play the game as one of each race, not to mention the difficulty of the game itself(and I love seeing Koume and Kotake on the good side :P) made it a fun experience too. Windwaker...wasn't really my favorite game...I like the alternate reality aspect of it, and the sailing wasn't so bad, and the castles were...creative...the gameplay was probably the only winner for me, It just loses it's luster about the time you recharge the Master Sword and have to go out and find the pieces of the Triforce of Courage before going to Ganon's Tower(I will admit I did like seeing Moblins again). Twilight Princess is probably my favorite Zelda second to Ocarina of Time, it's clean, it was inventive and fun, it was also dark. I about shit my pants the first time I saw a Skulltula in Twilight Princess, not to mention the redesign of the Poes and Redeads. And Link's transformation into the wolf. At first glance I was a bit skeptical of Wolf Link, but I came to like the controls, and Midna is far less annoying as a guide compared to a couple of flying orbs I can think of in previous titles. The complete lack of any magic power(exception Dominion Rod) actually makes the game a bit harder(not to mention the lengthy sidequests) in my opinion Twilight Princess was extremely well thought out, and I look forward to playing it again in it's entirety once I'm finished with Prime 3. (On a side-note, I actually prefer the Gamecube version of Twilight Princess, as the controls are far less clunky.)

Anyway, enough about Zelda. Back to Nintendo, they may not be the breadwinners of the gaming industry, but they are most definitely innovative. I guarantee that it won't be long until Sony and Microsoft jump on the 3D bandwagon either, especially if the popularity of the 3DS begins to surge once more games come out for it. And if Nintendo does come out with a new console next year, well, I look forward to seeing what they can come up with this time. They've had a lot of time to think on the flaws of their last system, so I don't really think they're quite done yet. Innovation is part of their game. There was a lot of excitement before the Wii came out(namely when it was still tagged "Revolution") and while a lot of fans were sorely disappointed within the subsequent years, I still expect to see a lot of excitement for the Wii 2, or Nintendo HD, whatever you want to call it, especially as specs and game titles become readily available leading up to the release. Nintendo may be outdone, outshined, and outplayed when it comes to technology, but when it comes to making cold hard cash, well, the numbers reflect who's been winning in that category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...