First Red Steel Review - Ouch!

[Zilla Man]

Gamespot gives it a 5.5.

Gaddy, you may want to start prepping that Nintendo apology thread...:17:

http://www.gamespot.com/events/wiilaunch/story.html?sid=6162018&pid=932528&tag=topslot;action;4&om_act=convert&click=topslot

[trebor]

Gamespot gives it a 5.5.

Gaddy, you may want to start prepping that Nintendo apology thread...:17:

http://www.gamespot.com/events/wiilaunch/story.html?sid=6162018&pid=932528&tag=topslot;action;4&om_act=convert&click=topslot

Number one, Nintendo didn't make Red Steel - Ubisoft made Red Steel.

Number two, did you even read the review before posting here?

Red Steel introduces a promising control scheme both for shooting thugs and for slashing them with samurai swords, but wraps it in a buggy, thoroughly unimpressive game.
The Good: Interesting take on first-person shooter controls; nice explosions and destructible environments.
The Bad: Clunky sword-fighting sequences slapped into the middle of all the shooting; inane story chock-full of painful dialogue and voice acting; numerous noticeable bugs and glitches.


So the controls were good, due to the part Nintendo played, but it's software and direction were poor, which is what Ubisoft had control of. Does one not see the obvious here?

An apology thread IS definitely needed, but it shouldn't be from Gaddy. It should be from Ubisoft and directed to gamers in general.

[Zilla Man]

Number one, Nintendo didn't make Red Steel - Ubisoft made Red Steel.

Number two, did you even read the review before posting here?


So the controls were good, due to the part Nintendo played, but it's software and direction were poor, which is what Ubisoft had control of. Does one not see the obvious here?

An apology thread IS definitely needed, but it shouldn't be from Gaddy. It should be from Ubisoft and directed to gamers in general.

1) I know Nintendo didn't make Red Steel. But it was made specificly to showcase what could be done on their system and they heavily promoted it. It was a 10 page cover story on Game Informer. And it was the only Wii game at E3 to have its own booth outside of the Nintendo area.

2) Yes I read the review. I was actually surprised that the score was so low. But that just proves what Glockstar and I were saying: that a good tech demo doesn't necessarily make a good game. The reviewer had the same problems I had when I played it. I just wrote off its shortcomings as a result of early development and the brief playtime I had on it. Unfortunately it appears I was wrong.

As far as the apology goes, I was just being facetious. Yes Ubisoft should apologize. But so should Gaddy. Especially if you apply his rationale hype/delivery ratio of his Sony apology thread to this game and the Wii. For months he's been pimping this game as the revolutionary Wii killer app. even more than the Xbots hyped Gears of War.

So while the controls were fine, the fact that the score was so low on a system that was supposed to highlight innovative gameplay is not good for Wii's image. Neither are the comments about the graphics.

I wasn't trying to Wii bash. The score (and review) just really shocked me. Let's hope the other original games designed specificly for the Wii score better. :cool:

[ilnadmy]

Meh. I always knew Red Steel was going to be crap (at least in terms of level design/story). When I first saw the on-stage demo at E3 I was like, "......the hell is this?" It seemed very promising up until that demo, and I remember a lot of sites had that same reaction.

Whatever, at least you have Zelda. That, along with some other games (maybe even including Red Steel) could tide you over until the next killer-app.

[Mochan]

Right now it's just a matter of waiting for a decent FPS to come out on the Wii. In the meantime I still have Call of Juarez, GRAW, and even Condemned to tide me over until then.

I was hoping the game would come up with a better showing, since I am hyped over the nunchuk to control a shooter.

[Gadfly2317]

Gamespot gives it a 5.5.

Gaddy, you may want to start prepping that Nintendo apology thread...:17:

http://www.gamespot.com/events/wiilaunch/story.html?sid=6162018&pid=932528&tag=topslot;action;4&om_act=convert&click=topslot

Apologize for what? The system is launching with a 70 hour perfect 10-score adventure game and backed up by several really original fun little decent-scoring games, and more big-gun stuff is on the way.

I would have liked to have seen a game like Red Steel--with its promising sword play--pulled off with the kind of polish and perfection that Twilight Princess was. It's a sadly wasted opportunity, but in the long run it doesn't matter. Crappy launch titles happen.

An instantaneous millions-sized base for the Wii and lower development costs virtually assures that developers will put out the effort to make great games for the system. It's already a fact the system is capable of great games and great gameplay; acting like Red Steel is a harbinger of doom is either just standard Sys Wars smalk talk or delusion.

[Zilla Man]

Apologize for what? The system is launching with a 70 hour perfect 10-score adventure game and backed up by several really original fun little decent-scoring games, and more big-gun stuff is on the way.

You're missing the point. You were all over Sony and MS for launch mistakes and same 'ol' same ol' games. While both had screw ups the difference is that those companies are actually trying to push the envelope (technically) in videogaming. Both systems had brand new more powerful hardware and games/gameplay elements that couldn't have been done last generation. They emphasized that in their hype/press releases so I can understand criticisms of both companies when the technical aspects fail to come through.

Nintendo, on the other hand, is charging gamers $250 for stuff that could have been and was done last generation. The games that are supposed to highlight the Wii's supposedly innovative features (Red Steel, Excite Truck, Wii Sports, ) have been getting poor to middling reviews on graphics and gameplay. You seem to be conveniently ignoring those facts. It's one thing to have low game scores at launch; it's another when those scores are from supposed "killer apps" that you were supposed to buying the system for. If you're going to criticize Sony and MS for failing to deliver what they promised, then you need to hold Nintendo to the bar they set for themselves.

Zelda, a Cube game ported over to Wii, getting high scores is nice, but it means nothing in the context of what I'm talking about. It doesn't do anything revolutionary that merits dropping $250 on a new system when it could have easily been done on the Cube:

From the Gamespot Review:

It's good that Twilight Princess' world and puzzle design can carry it, because the combat and boss fights aren't very deep at all. Most enemies just require you to swing your sword at them, which is done by shaking the Wii Remote or shaking the Nunchuk for a spin attack. You can lock onto enemies with the Z trigger and strafe around them, hop back and forth, leap in for a jumping attack, or jump back and out of the way--the same basic moves as past installments. But normally you can just keep on shaking the Wii Remote like a maniac and come out on top against most enemies. There's no finesse to the way the Wii Remote is used, and at times you'll wish that you could just hit a button to swing the sword instead of dealing with all the motion-sensing nonsense. This is especially true in the rare cases that require you to time your sword swings properly, as well as once you start learning a few extra moves, like the shield bash, which is done by shoving the Nunchuk controller forward. Most of the time, performing this move resulted in a spin attack. The combat controls using the Wii Remote may feel somewhat different from past games, but it doesn't draw you into the experience any more than using a standard controller would, and at worst, it's imprecise.

He even says that the Wii control element feels like it's been tacked on at the last minute. Now that doesn't mean it's not a fun game. But to charge $250 for a system, promise a new and exciting gameplay experience and then just give consumers something that easily could have been done on (and looks like it was) on the Cubeisn't "revolutionary" or "innovative" at all. It's deceptive.

While I don't think that Red Steel's low scores are the harbringer of doom for the Wii, it certainly doesn't bode well for a game that was so hyped as a killer app. Add to that the other low to middling scores for games on hardware that programmers have known for six years, and it gets even more disappointing. Let's face it, if Resistance or GOW had scores that low, you'd be the first one bashing MS and Sony about the games failing to live up to next generation standards. But at least And if each of the launched with either a Halo or a Final Fantasy, you'd be whining about lack of innovation or change in gameplay.

The whole point of the Wii was supposedly to give a new, exciting gameplay experience that was different from the other consoles. Based on the reviews we've seen (and what I've played), that hasn't happened yet. To me that's just as bad as MS or Sony not living up to their hype. Like I said before, you're going to criticize Sony and MS for failing to deliver what they promised, then you need to hold Nintendo to the bar they set for themselves and failing to deliver what they promised. My point isn't to bash Nintendo (even though I'm very disappointed so far) but to point out your hypocrisy.

[Glockstar]

"...you'll wish that you could just hit a button to swing the sword instead of dealing with all the motion-sensing nonsense."

Motion. Sensing. Nonsense. EXACTAMUNDO!

[ThaMaskedGamer]

doesn't look like there is much on the Wii. Most of the games are getting average reviews. I didn't expect much from Wii so I'm not as critical as I was with the PS3. I don't know how one could have big expectations from the Wii.

[Mochan]

Wii is one of those dark horses that will probably gain attention as times goes by, assuming more 3rd party games come out for it. It's the kind of console that you'll dismiss, only to have it pleasantly surprise you later out of nowhere. Since you don't expect much out of it, it never really disappoints.

360 is a console that comes out guns blaring and likes to start strong. So far it's done just that.

PS3 is a console that you know will start slow and will slowly gain momentum to turn into a behemoth. Assuming it doesn't die before it reaches critical mass.

[folken001]

M$ is in the business to lose money. If its strategy is to release console early at all cost, what's the point?

[Pandarbock]

If you read through the meat of the review it is easy to see Greg Kasavin should have just said I hate the Wii its graphics will always be crap and damned any type of control that trys to replace what he is used too. While I agree with some of what he says, mainly the cheesy voice acting and dialog, I think he is completely full of it as far as what he says about the controls. The the gun play and sword fighting both control quite well and do in fact feel quite immersive. Reloading, opening doors, and knocking over tables as well as picking up weapons feel quite good by just thumping the nunchuk down. Gernades are also quite fun as you actually make the throwing motion. As far as the graphics, it is quite plain to see Greg Kasavin at the very least as well as probably many reviewers aren't going to base the graphical score of Wii games in reference to other Wii games but rather score them against PS3 and 360 visuals, because although they don't look like ps3 or 360 calibur redsteel is probably one of the best looking game for wii launch, and so far from what I have seen from playing, has had some neat effects and pleasing visuals.

[joquito]

If you read through the meat of the review it is easy to see Greg Kasavin should have just said I hate the Wii its graphics will always be crap and damned any type of control that trys to replace what he is used too. While I agree with some of what he says, mainly the cheesy voice acting and dialog, I think he is completely full of it as far as what he says about the controls. The the gun play and sword fighting both control quite well and do in fact feel quite immersive. Reloading, opening doors, and knocking over tables as well as picking up weapons feel quite good by just thumping the nunchuk down. Gernades are also quite fun as you actually make the throwing motion. As far as the graphics, it is quite plain to see Greg Kasavin at the very least as well as probably many reviewers aren't going to base the graphical score of Wii games in reference to other Wii games but rather score them against PS3 and 360 visuals, because although they don't look like ps3 or 360 calibur redsteel is probably one of the best looking game for wii launch, and so far from what I have seen from playing, has had some neat effects and pleasing visuals.

Well Michael Donahoe of 1up seems to feel the same way.

"Red Steel looks like a worthy game to keep your Wii warm this holiday season, but it only half succeeds: The game itself is entertaining, but ultimately forgettable. You see, Red Steel slices its creativity off at the controls. Once you get over the novelty of cappin' fools with a plastic remote, you're left with just an average shooter that does absolutely nothing you haven't seen (or shot) a million times before.

Wii games might not push as many polygons as Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 games, but we do know that they don't have to look this bad. Normally I wouldn't complain, but at this year's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3), Ubisoft showed off a snazzy trailer that it promised was actual gameplay footage. That was clearly not the case -- the game doesn't look anything like that infamous target video. It looks worse...a lot worse.

Graphics alone wouldn't matter that much, but I actually had a hard time getting through the game because of the poor visuals. For example, a large number of levels require you to take out sneaky snipers who position themselves on ledges far from your sight -- pretty common, sure -- but when it comes time to return the fire, the textures for the snipers are so bad that only way to find them is to let them shoot you (and hope you don't die) and then trace the fire back to where they are hiding. Even then half the time I couldn't find the enemy and had to rely on my pointer turning red to signify I finally found the source of my frustration.

While the grungy graphics made my eyes cry, the controls at least left my hands somewhat happy. The standard FPS controls translated rather well to the game (you move with the analog Nunchuk while you aim with the Wii Remote). Even simple things like reloading (done by shaking the Nunchuk) made for an entertaining experience. And you can hear your gun reloading via the Wii Remote's speaker -- kitschy, but still cool. The only problem I have with the controls is zooming in to aim. In order to get a more precise shot (especially while using the sniper rifle) you have to point the Remote close to the television (the closer you point, the closer your gun zooms in). While the functionality works fine, it is difficult to properly get off a close shot while a bunch of bad guys are swarming you. Getting a headshot with the sniper rifle is even worse: By the time you move the camera in and are ready to pull the trigger, you're likely to get shot yourself. At least the game gives you the clichéd "Focus" shot to take down a number of foes in slow motion. You can even choose to disarm the enemies (done by shooting their weapons) as opposed to killing them to earn respect points (used to increase your focus meter). Disarming sounds pretty lame, but the game rewards you for being a law-abiding do-gooder. Subdue the unique boss (noted by an icon above his head) for an area, and all the thugs will also surrender. Toward the latter part of the game, you'll find creating peace rather than inflicting punishment will make progressing a helluva lot easier.

When you're not running and gunning, you'll be dodging and slashing. The samurai fighting seems like it'd work well: swing the Wii Remote and Nunchuk to mimic actual swordplay. The problem is, unlike the shooting controls that seemed to register all my movements, here I swung and swung...and missed and missed. No matter how many times I tried (and I went about it several different ways), I could never seem to master the controls without wildly thrusting my arms around, praying one of my random motions would equate to a hit. Even when I fiddled around with the different sword katas (combos), I found they only worked 50 percent of the time. Controls aside, the sword fighting itself was rather lame in the context of the game. It doesn't make sense that you're going through 90 percent of the game pumping a few hundred pounds of lead into dudes and then, for some reason, you ditch the gun for a sword. Why? Just shoot them in the head -- trust me, it'll be much easier. But of course, you're forced to slash it out, only to fight gun-toting enemies a few steps later. And the pacing is rather repetitive. You clear a room, sword fight, and then repeat. By the 20th sword fight, I got bored swinging my arms around, especially when the difficulty of the fights went from ridiculously easy to frustratingly hard.

And the four-player splitscreen multiplayer, while somewhat fun, is sooo two gens ago. After playing games online, it's hard to revert back to the archaic act of herding four friends together in a room. And the modes aren't that special either: ho-hum deathmatch, an even ho-hummer team match, and a wacky mode entitled "Killer." This last mode is a great idea. During the beginning of the round everyone's Remote will ring like a phone. Once you answer it, a mysterious voice will give you a different objective (usually to kill a specific character in the round) and let you go at it. The problem is, everyone is standing so close to each other that the secret message ain't so much a secret as it is blatant public knowledge. Plus, since you have to put the Wii Remote up to your ear like a phone, and...you aim with it, too...you're pretty much a standing target.

Don't be fooled into thinking Red Steel reinvents the FPS. It's nothing more than a ho-hum shooter with a creative but flawed gimmick stapled on. Sure, it might not steal the launch lineup, but at least it proves this type of game is welcome on the Wii. "

[trebor]

Zelda, a Cube game ported over to Wii, getting high scores is nice, but it means nothing in the context of what I'm talking about. It doesn't do anything revolutionary that merits dropping $250 on a new system when it could have easily been done on the Cube:

From the Gamespot Review:

It's good that Twilight Princess' world and puzzle design can carry it, because the combat and boss fights aren't very deep at all. Most enemies just require you to swing your sword at them, which is done by shaking the Wii Remote or shaking the Nunchuk for a spin attack. You can lock onto enemies with the Z trigger and strafe around them, hop back and forth, leap in for a jumping attack, or jump back and out of the way--the same basic moves as past installments. But normally you can just keep on shaking the Wii Remote like a maniac and come out on top against most enemies. There's no finesse to the way the Wii Remote is used, and at times you'll wish that you could just hit a button to swing the sword instead of dealing with all the motion-sensing nonsense. This is especially true in the rare cases that require you to time your sword swings properly, as well as once you start learning a few extra moves, like the shield bash, which is done by shoving the Nunchuk controller forward. Most of the time, performing this move resulted in a spin attack. The combat controls using the Wii Remote may feel somewhat different from past games, but it doesn't draw you into the experience any more than using a standard controller would, and at worst, it's imprecise.

He even says that the Wii control element feels like it's been tacked on at the last minute. Now that doesn't mean it's not a fun game. But to charge $250 for a system, promise a new and exciting gameplay experience and then just give consumers something that easily could have been done on (and looks like it was) on the Cubeisn't "revolutionary" or "innovative" at all. It's deceptive.

The real question is how long did it take you to find the one review that didn't speak positively about the control scheme and score Zelda a 9+?

I've gotta say Zilla, this thread is libel to back-fire on you the second someone brings up some of the atrocious scoring PS3 launch games:

Genji: Days of the Blade PS3 55.8%
Untold Legends: Dark PS3 57.9%
Gundam: Crossfire PS3 34.1%
NBA 07 PS3 65.4%

Hell, the top ranking PS3 launch title didn't even crack a 90%+ ranking:
Resistance: Fall of Man PS3 88.4%

So, if you're entire argument centers on Red Steel and it's poor reviews as an argument against the Wii, then what do these crap scores say about the PS3? That the PS3 is even MORE unnecessary then the Wii and a bigger failure? What good is having all that power if the games are just trash, eh?

This thread is rubbish.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Well Michael Donahoe of 1up seems to feel the same way.

"Red Steel looks like a worthy game to keep your Wii warm this holiday season, but it only half succeeds: The game itself is entertaining, but ultimately forgettable. You see, Red Steel slices its creativity off at the controls. Once you get over the novelty of cappin' fools with a plastic remote, you're left with just an average shooter that does absolutely nothing you haven't seen (or shot) a million times before.

Wii games might not push as many polygons as Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 games, but we do know that they don't have to look this bad. Normally I wouldn't complain, but at this year's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3), Ubisoft showed off a snazzy trailer that it promised was actual gameplay footage. That was clearly not the case -- the game doesn't look anything like that infamous target video. It looks worse...a lot worse.

Graphics alone wouldn't matter that much, but I actually had a hard time getting through the game because of the poor visuals. For example, a large number of levels require you to take out sneaky snipers who position themselves on ledges far from your sight -- pretty common, sure -- but when it comes time to return the fire, the textures for the snipers are so bad that only way to find them is to let them shoot you (and hope you don't die) and then trace the fire back to where they are hiding. Even then half the time I couldn't find the enemy and had to rely on my pointer turning red to signify I finally found the source of my frustration.

While the grungy graphics made my eyes cry, the controls at least left my hands somewhat happy. The standard FPS controls translated rather well to the game (you move with the analog Nunchuk while you aim with the Wii Remote). Even simple things like reloading (done by shaking the Nunchuk) made for an entertaining experience. And you can hear your gun reloading via the Wii Remote's speaker -- kitschy, but still cool. The only problem I have with the controls is zooming in to aim. In order to get a more precise shot (especially while using the sniper rifle) you have to point the Remote close to the television (the closer you point, the closer your gun zooms in). While the functionality works fine, it is difficult to properly get off a close shot while a bunch of bad guys are swarming you. Getting a headshot with the sniper rifle is even worse: By the time you move the camera in and are ready to pull the trigger, you're likely to get shot yourself. At least the game gives you the clichéd "Focus" shot to take down a number of foes in slow motion. You can even choose to disarm the enemies (done by shooting their weapons) as opposed to killing them to earn respect points (used to increase your focus meter). Disarming sounds pretty lame, but the game rewards you for being a law-abiding do-gooder. Subdue the unique boss (noted by an icon above his head) for an area, and all the thugs will also surrender. Toward the latter part of the game, you'll find creating peace rather than inflicting punishment will make progressing a helluva lot easier.

When you're not running and gunning, you'll be dodging and slashing. The samurai fighting seems like it'd work well: swing the Wii Remote and Nunchuk to mimic actual swordplay. The problem is, unlike the shooting controls that seemed to register all my movements, here I swung and swung...and missed and missed. No matter how many times I tried (and I went about it several different ways), I could never seem to master the controls without wildly thrusting my arms around, praying one of my random motions would equate to a hit. Even when I fiddled around with the different sword katas (combos), I found they only worked 50 percent of the time. Controls aside, the sword fighting itself was rather lame in the context of the game. It doesn't make sense that you're going through 90 percent of the game pumping a few hundred pounds of lead into dudes and then, for some reason, you ditch the gun for a sword. Why? Just shoot them in the head -- trust me, it'll be much easier. But of course, you're forced to slash it out, only to fight gun-toting enemies a few steps later. And the pacing is rather repetitive. You clear a room, sword fight, and then repeat. By the 20th sword fight, I got bored swinging my arms around, especially when the difficulty of the fights went from ridiculously easy to frustratingly hard.

And the four-player splitscreen multiplayer, while somewhat fun, is sooo two gens ago. After playing games online, it's hard to revert back to the archaic act of herding four friends together in a room. And the modes aren't that special either: ho-hum deathmatch, an even ho-hummer team match, and a wacky mode entitled "Killer." This last mode is a great idea. During the beginning of the round everyone's Remote will ring like a phone. Once you answer it, a mysterious voice will give you a different objective (usually to kill a specific character in the round) and let you go at it. The problem is, everyone is standing so close to each other that the secret message ain't so much a secret as it is blatant public knowledge. Plus, since you have to put the Wii Remote up to your ear like a phone, and...you aim with it, too...you're pretty much a standing target.

Don't be fooled into thinking Red Steel reinvents the FPS. It's nothing more than a ho-hum shooter with a creative but flawed gimmick stapled on. Sure, it might not steal the launch lineup, but at least it proves this type of game is welcome on the Wii. "

<b>It's nothing more than a ho-hum shooter with a creative but flawed gimmick stapled on.</b>

Has anyone read anything about the fatigue factor? I would imagine it would get rather tiresome playing Wii for a few hours. Not to say exercise is a bad thing!

This review pointed out a lot of areas that I could foresee would be problematic with the Wii controller and traditional FPS. The only way it will be GREAT and not a gimmick is when/if developers build the game from the ground up around the Wii-mote. It appears from reviews it was tacked on in Zelda(though that game is getting rave reviews) and tacked on here in this game. I'm more concerned about the lack of quality titles though. I don't think the Wii is off to a good start software wise. I see Zelda doing big numbers of course, but Nintendo has NEVER had a problem selling their own games on their home console it is the other guy who usually struggles. I'd imagine Red Steel and a few other games will do well by default, simply cause its launch. Can the Wii keep it up? Remember GC got off to an equal start, just about, in NA with the XBOX.

[Zilla Man]

The real question is how long did it take you to find the one review that didn't speak positively about the control scheme and score Zelda a 9+?

I've gotta say Zilla, this thread is libel to back-fire on you the second someone brings up some of the atrocious scoring PS3 launch games:

Genji: Days of the Blade PS3 55.8%
Untold Legends: Dark PS3 57.9%
Gundam: Crossfire PS3 34.1%
NBA 07 PS3 65.4%

Hell, the top ranking PS3 launch title didn't even crack a 90%+ ranking:
Resistance: Fall of Man PS3 88.4%

So, if you're entire argument centers on Red Steel and it's poor reviews as an argument against the Wii, then what do these crap scores say about the PS3? That the PS3 is even MORE unnecessary then the Wii and a bigger failure? What good is having all that power if the games are just trash, eh?

This thread is rubbish.

*sigh*

Go back and actually read my post (the second one) - and tthis time take off the Link cap. :rolleyes: My point wasn't that Zelda isn't a good game but that the whole "revolutionary, new way of playing" that Nintendo promised you couldn't get on any other console wasn't present.

Nintendo's whole selling point of the Wii is that the console "will usher in a whole new era of gameplay" due to the controller. None of their launch games have done that. See below.

The games that are supposed to highlight the Wii's supposedly innovative features (Red Steel, Excite Truck, Wii Sports, ) have been getting poor to middling reviews on graphics and gameplay. You seem to be conveniently ignoring those facts. It's one thing to have low game scores at launch; it's another when those scores are from supposed "killer apps" that you were supposed to buying the system for. If you're going to criticize Sony and MS for failing to deliver what they promised, then you need to hold Nintendo to the bar they set for themselves.

My main point is that Gadfly is all over MS and Sony when they fail to deliver but refuses to even acknowledge that Nintendo hasn't exactly set the world on fire with it's killer apps. Let say Sony promised "a new revolutionary RPG gameplay style"and then launched PS3 with Final Fantasy XII except they didn't change anything from FFX. The score results would be still in the upper 90%. But some reviewers would take it to task and I know that Gaddy sure as hell would. And you know what? He'd be right! Or if MS did the same thing with Halo 3 fora 360 launch. That's how I look at Wii Zelda.

Is Zelda a great game? I'm sure it is. But the high scores aren't because of the Wii mote. Since everything else could have been done on the Cube, then what's the point of getting a Wii right now? Red Steel was supposed to be the Wii's Resistance/Halo killer app answer to that question. Considering the development time, hype, and claims from Ubisoft and Nintendo, about the Wii mote ,the scores for Red Steel are a bad sign. As for the other games (especially the pack in) I'm hearing the words "tech demo" in more and more Wii reviews.

The Sony games you mentioned are all sh*t. We know that. Of course I'd rather play Zelda than those. But Resistance was Sony's launch killer app and it's getting great scores. And it showcases gameplay elements that you couldn't get on the console's previous Sony incarnation. I've yet to hear that about anything on Wii (including Zelda).

What good is having all that power if the games are just trash, eh?


I totally agree. That's why I'm not getting a PS3 until 2007! :thumbsup: But what good is paying $250 for an antiquated system that emphasizes brand new gameplay experiences over graphics and then fails to deliver on those things on launch? The Wii may come into its own in 2007. But just as Sony and MS both underdelivered on their launches, so did Nintendo.

If you can't understand that then we'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is cool by me.:cool:

Like I said before, I hope we do see some creative things from Nintendo. I'm not a graphics whore and still play PS1 games. But right now I'm not paying $250 for last generation tech. If Smash Bros., Metroid, and Mario are all like Zelda, Cube games that just have the Wii control scheme "slapped on" but not actually push the gameplay envelope forward like Gaddy is always crying for, than this is one "Revolution" I'll sit out.

[Fivespot]

M$ is in the business to lose money. If its strategy is to release console early at all cost, what's the point?

Because by the time the PS3 releases almost a year later, tech will have advanced to the point where MS won't lose money on each console but will rather make a profit.

As the old business rule goes, you have to spend money to make money.

What is Sony losing on each PS3? $241.35 on the 60gig and $306.85 on the 20gig according to a recent article I read.

Link:

http://www.isuppli.com/news/default.asp?id=6919

[folken001]

Because by the time the PS3 releases almost a year later, tech will have advanced to the point where MS won't lose money on each console but will rather make a profit.

As the old business rule goes, you have to spend money to make money.

What is Sony losing on each PS3? $241.35 on the 60gig and $306.85 on the 20gig according to a recent article I read.

Link:

http://www.isuppli.com/news/default.asp?id=6919
When's the last business plan you saw recommended a company to lose billions of dollars for almost a decade?

[Glockstar]

Now what are you talking about?

[Fivespot]

When's the last business plan you saw recommended a company to lose billions of dollars for almost a decade?

Didn't the XBOX come out in 2000 or 2001 and the 360 last year? What's this about a 10 year cycle losing billions of dollars? From my calculations, MS has been in the console biz for about 5-6 years.

I won't argue that they lost billions on the XBOX but I'm sure their whole plan especially as it relates to the 360 was to start making money this year and indeed it's happening.

[Zilla Man]

Matt Casamassina, IGN's resident Nintendo editor seems to agree with me that Red Steel's problem is a major one:

"The much bigger problem with the project, however, is that it utilizes the Wii remote and nunchuk but does not introduce control mechanics that feel in any way better than a dual-analog configuration. In fact, compared to a traditional console first-person shooter like TimeSplitters, Red Steel's controls are a positive step backward. "

He does think the game is "sometimes" fun :confused: , but check out the middle sentence of this statement:

"Still, the very strange part about this game is that despite this crippling issue - is there anything more important to the success of Wii games than control? - Red Steel is sometimes still fun."

"And we think that there will be a lot of gamers who will completely ignore any control drawbacks and focus on the prettier visuals and varied play. But these people will be kidding themselves, for although Red Steel was born to use Wii's controller, it rarely uses it in a satisfyingly intuitive manner."

"Red Steel doesn't live up to the hype. It nails everything except gameplay control, which is absolutely and indisputably the most important factor."

Considering that the major selling point of the Wii is the control, that's a major problem. If a game designed from the ground up specificly to showcase what the Wii could do drops the ball so badly, what does that say about the supposed "revolutionary" system?

He closes with:

"I've given Red Still a 6.0, which by IGN's own description is passable. In our description for this score, we write, "Games in this range have more blemishes than strengths, but still might be worth a look." In contrast, Red Steel has a great deal more strengths than it does weaknesses, but its one weakness is a whopper. A few of you will be able to overlook that whopper, but the majority of us won't."

Passable? The Wii's Killer App that supposed to show the future of gaming on the system is only "passable?" :(

My point is that Red Steel's failure is at least as big a problem as any Sony or MS screw ups that they experienced at their launches. Probably even more so considering that it was the selling point for the system. So for Gadfly to wring his hands about the Sony and MS launch problems yet ignore this major one from Nintendo, is just hypocritical.

[Glockstar]

Yeah but it's innovative. [Huffffffffffff...] ...It's all about the innovation, man.

[Gadfly2317]

Yeah but it's innovative. [Huffffffffffff...] ...It's all about the innovation, man.

A homeless guy snuck in and took a dump in one of the potted plants where I work recently. I thought that was a pretty innovative.

[trebor]

*sigh*

Go back and actually read my post (the second one) - and tthis time take off the Link cap. :rolleyes: My point wasn't that Zelda isn't a good game but that the whole "revolutionary, new way of playing" that Nintendo promised you couldn't get on any other console wasn't present.

Nintendo's whole selling point of the Wii is that the console "will usher in a whole new era of gameplay" due to the controller. None of their launch games have done that. See below.

According to one opinion. According to my own opinion, I have never played a sports game like I've played Wii Sports so, surprise, it sure as hell is a new way of playing to me.

Zelda perhaps less so, but even with it's new control scheme it is very playable, and perhaps even MORE playable when compared to traditional control schemes in certain cases. Is it perfect? No, but it could have been a lot worse.



Is Zelda a great game? I'm sure it is. But the high scores aren't because of the Wii mote. Since everything else could have been done on the Cube, then what's the point of getting a Wii right now? Red Steel was supposed to be the Wii's Resistance/Halo killer app answer to that question. Considering the development time, hype, and claims from Ubisoft and Nintendo, about the Wii mote ,the scores for Red Steel are a bad sign. As for the other games (especially the pack in) I'm hearing the words "tech demo" in more and more Wii reviews.

Well, if you would read other Zelda reviews from other gaming sites, they pour on the accolades for the new control scheme. In fact, Matt Cassamasina (spelling?) said that he could never go back to the traditional style of control for Zelda, now that he has played through the Wii version.

Also, who in the world was saying Red Steel was supposed to be the Wii's Resistance/Halo killer app? It sure as hell wasn't me, but you CAN quote me on saying that Metroid 3 WILL be the Wii Resistance/Halo killer app.

On a side note, I can't think of a single Ubisoft game that was worth more then a stinky crap in the last few years. Prince of Persia is good, as is BG&E, but what else is there? These guys are worse then EA when it comes to mediocrity and being out of touch with gamers.


The Sony games you mentioned are all sh*t. We know that. Of course I'd rather play Zelda than those. But Resistance was Sony's launch killer app and it's getting great scores. And it showcases gameplay elements that you couldn't get on the console's previous Sony incarnation. I've yet to hear that about anything on Wii (including Zelda).

Well, then you need to read more Wii Zelda reviews, because you clearly need more perspective. The aiming alone for Link's ranged weaponry is vastly improved over any previous version of the game. The controls are responsive with a fairly low learning curve.

With that said, even if you skip the Wii version, do yourself a favor and play TP on the Cube. :)

[theWacoKid]

Passable? The Wii's Killer App that supposed to show the future of gaming on the system is only "passable?" :(

My point is that Red Steel's failure is at least as big a problem as any Sony or MS screw ups that they experienced at their launches. Probably even more so considering that it was the selling point for the system. So for Gadfly to wring his hands about the Sony and MS launch problems yet ignore this major one from Nintendo, is just hypocritical.

You're without a doubt, the biggest dumbass on this forum. When was Red Steel ever the Wii's Killer App? This game was profiled as one the big disappointments at E3. Weren't you there? You said you were. The game fell off the hype bandwagon ages ago, you're just so effin slow, you didn't notice.

[GameLegend]

Okay i am entering in this discussion super late. I think i have a say since i was the first one to constantly point this game out when the trailer came out.

one thing, it was well known for months the controls were flawed. Really flawed. I consistently kept up to date with IGN, who constantly pointed concerns about their large box rectile. I mean ya u point and shoot headshots easily like the light gun zapper, but when it came to turning around, that was a huge problem. Other FPS games have addressed it, like COD3 and Metroid. So far, Metroid is regarded as the best Wii controls on FPS, and mimcied mouse-keyboard. But Ubi seemed relunctant to change, for some unknow reason.

This is the price they pay, and frankly i could give a rats ass about this game. They over hyped it. They made it look like the sword fighting would be 3d dimensional. It was only horizontal, verticals, and across slashes that counted.

It quite a pitty. U can tell Ubi spent a considerable amount of money makking this game. The graphical polish is nice. But where they screwed up is where most of it counts. And for that, for their consistent onetrack approach without listening to fans and journalists concerns on the control, i could care less. The game has been regarded as a great game, but controls is where it counts, plain and simple.

By the way, it still has pixel per pixel percision control, when u are not turning atleast.