From the review, "I picked up Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper a bit late, but I’m glad I didn’t pass it up. This game is so over-the-top in story and action, and it makes such obvious use of the Wii U Gamepad, that it has become my favorite launch title. I haven’t played all of them, but I don’t see how anything available at the present moment could top it..."
"The Wii U has a problem. It isn’t the lack of games. Well, that is part of it. The issue is that developers and publishers are looking at the system and its meager library and, instead of creating new content that would make people want to buy the system, they’re releasing ports of games PS3, Xbox 360 and PC owners had years ago. It’s so terribly disappointing and the system deserves better."
Can you do HD with sprite based game of that nature? I would imagine doing HD remakes of 64/GCN games was more feasible.
If you don't mind redoing all the art. Just like Final Fantasy 1&2 20th anniversary or Street Fighter II HD.
I have a feeling that some games would upgrade better than others.
broken record much?
Is it as tiring for you to write the same crap over and over as it is for us to read over and over?
We get it, you dislike nintendo. Move on already.
As to the main topic, hey...games are games. i wont discredit a company that wants to release a game for a platform that didnt have said game prior. Regardless of if its a port or not.
Companies tend to play it safe with something that was a proven formula on one system to see if it has the same success on another. This is not something new by any means.
there have been ports of games on systems as far back as the 2600 and colecovision. Difference between then and now is they strive for parity between ports or at the least make improvements on the later version that they didnt catch on the former version.
new games will come and go but no need to discredit the ones that get ported.
Why we already played those games years ago when we were kids and again via the wii virtual console. What is wrong with new ips or innovative games?
I like to think of them as GOTY editions instead of year old ports. If someone is strictly a Nintendo console owner, they must be at least somewhat happy with these games. I know a huge Nintendo fan that was blown away when he finally got the chance to play Mass Effect 3 on a Nintendo console.
How sad a next generation system with no new ips or innovative games that push the industry forward that challenge the status quo and crumbles the old standards of gaming. Since when should be praising or giving in to $60.00 plus tax for old ass games that came on this current generation. Hell these games should cost $20.00 or $40.00 dollars due to be a year or two year old games. Were are the standards of Nintendo fans why settled for less that I do not understand.
I highly doubt the game will be $60, also I seem to recall a time right after the PS3 released that the games were atrocious to say the least, the Six Axis was implemented poorly in games like Lair. There was attempted innovation just like Nintendo is attempting innovation.
Sony ended up fine, Nintendo will end up fine, they just need some quality games. At this point, it doesn't matter if they are year old ports or not.
It's Nintendo's own fault. They have an antiquated way of thinking that makes them think that they can do as little as possible and continue to achieve success. You want 3rd party developers to make games for the Wii U? They have to have a good reason to make them.
I fail to see how nintendo is doing as little as possible. Developers the world over have said that its not about pure power, its about what the deveopler does with what they have to work with. I wouldnt say they are being "lazy" by trying to change the ay people pplay, again as they did with the Wii. The gamepad will be Nintendos ace in the hole once Nintendo creates more experiences around it. Once they do, people will "get it". So yes it is their own fault, but they are preparing develpopers for the future by making them think outside the box. What are they gonna do when all the games that are made are just prettier versions of the same experiences over and over again. The video game world needs nintendo!
Because they are literally trying to go for a Wii 2.0 with a different controller and slightly better tech thinking the world will just flock to it like they did the Wii. The Wii was truly something completely different, and it had the support of celebrity endorsement plus incredibly cheap price point. The Wii U just looks like an extension to the Wii and the tablet controller is annoying.
"What are they gonna do when all the games that are made are just prettier versions of the same experiences over and over again."
You mean like Nintendo's been doing forever? Changing the controller isn't going to work more than once.
"You mean like Nintendo's been doing forever? Changing the controller isn't going to work more than once."
You cannot tell me Super Mario 64, Sunshine and Galaxy are the same game or meet the same sort of monotonous standard as Call of Duty.
You're a sensible individual from your blog posts. You can't possibly be trying to tell me that Nintendo is somehow doing less when they are simply doing something differently from the other two. Furthermore, I wouldn't call the Wii U's specs "slightly better" than the Wii's.
The "tablet" controller is no more obstructive than the Vita's touch screen or rear panels. It weighs about the same as a 360 controller. It's literally a regular controller with a square body and a screen in the middle. If anything the Wiimote is more annoying because it limits what play styles to essentially waggle over button press.
"You cannot tell me Super Mario 64, Sunshine and Galaxy."
Nope, I'm not telling you that. I'm telling you to look at New Super Mario Bros and see how many games have come out with that name. I'm telling you to look at the Zelda remakes. Nintendo is redoing their franchises as they always do.
"You can't possibly be trying to tell me that Nintendo is somehow doing less when they are simply doing something differently from the other two."
Actually I am. They are doing something different from the other two, but they aren't doing much different from themselves. They are relying on a controller gimmick again only this time people don't seem to be interested. Why? Because that's the casual crowd. They are interested one day, disinterested the next. You have to do more than use the same business model again.
"Furthermore, I wouldn't call the Wii U's specs "slightly better" than the Wii's."
Ok then, on par with the current gen then. Still not really an improvement that they should have gone for.
"The "tablet" controller is no more obstructive than the Vita's touch screen or rear panels. It weighs about the same as a 360 controller. It's literally a regular controller with a square body and a screen in the middle."
Having tried out the Wii U tablet, I can tell you that it is an annoying controller, far too large and not nearly as contoured as say the Vita or 3DS. The design of the tablet makes the buttons feel odd and I can't think of a single person who can honestly say with a straight face that they want a controller that large and clunky. This isn't the days of the NES anymore but Nintendo seems to be trying to go back to it.
At least the Wii U has the Pro Controller, but I don't see the Wii U coming close to the success of the Wii.
"Nintendo is redoing their franchises as they always do."
There is only one NSMB game per platform and there is only one existing remake of a Zelda game with another still in development. Granted Nintendo produces sequels to older franchise, but I fail to see a problem with that since those franchises have been doing well for the better part of over two decades. Not to mention that, at least as a fan, I see each iteration as something familiar but also fresh. If you don't see at that way, then that is fine. But I don't think Nintendo making another Mario or Zelda is anymore harmful than Sony making another Killzone or Ratchet or Microsoft putting out another Gears or Halo well after their initial trilogies have ended.
A system that can run Unreal Engine 4 is not on par with the 360/PS3. Period. I reject that kind of rhetoric completely. You can argue that it needs to be scaled down, but neither the PS3 nor the 360 can even run that.
The Wii U probably will not see the same success as the Wii. That much to which I can concede. But I don't think that stops it from being a quality console. It has potential that has not been tapped and the amount of functionality in it has a lot of possibilities in it, I think.
It is the price Nintendo has to pay for being 'late to the HD party' according to 3rd party publishers. If the Wii U was released when instead of the original Wii i don't think we would see these problems happening with the system.
Nintendo's reluctance has once again proven to bite them back the same when they resisted the idea of moving to an optical format for the N64.
Don't get me wrong the industry needs a healthy Nintendo but i do believe they need to adjust to the changing landscape of the industry. It is ok to still do what Nintendo does best but embrace change when they do come.
The industry needs to adjust to Nintendo, not vice versa. If Nintendo was not in the game, we would have another industry crash as companies will just switch everything to the free-to-play model and all that crap.I will support Nintendo because I dont want the industry going down the path it has been. Ill be damned if all we have is COD clones and cheap cell phone game experiences. Fuck that.
The gaming industry does NOT have to adjust to Nintendo. We get it, Nintendo saved the gaming industry. Guess what, that was over 25 years ago. If Nintendo decides to do things the same way they did 25 years ago? Fine. More power to them. But if they don't adjust to the new generation, and stick with the same IP every gen, and they lose, it's their OWN fault. It's a miracle that Mario has been Nintendo's mascot for this long. No matter what genre Mario is in, it's STILL MARIO. How many wants to bet everyone and their grandparents have heard of Super Mario? In fact, I bet a lot of non-gamers still call any console a Nintendo, and every game a Mario? Not every Mario game sell (they couldn't help the GameCube and N64 from stopping the PS1 and PS2), but Nintendo has created way too many Mario games, and if having Mario stops them from adjusting to the current gen, well it's their own business, and no one should have to wait or adjust for them.
The industry needs to adjust to the changing demographics of it's user base, not to the whims of any one company that exists inside it.
What Izumo and Generic are saying is that Nintendo tends to take a very old school approach towards it's products. It's been said by many Nintendo fans that "Nintendo does it's own thing". That in itself is fine, but it's the consumers that decide whether or not Nintendo's "thing" is what they want.
When it comes to a development standpoint, a developer is going to go where they can make their games. If they're looking to make Halo or Uncharted, they would not be looking at the Wii. If they're looking at making the big AAA new IP's of next gen, they probably aren't going to be looking at the Wii U. So tell me, why does the industry need to be held back by Nintendo's need to push out underpowered tech, with gimmicks which may or may not catch on? It's not their responsibility to keep Nintendo alive, they are in it to create their own ideas, and hopefully make a profit.
Any major company CAN NOT ignore market trends and changing consumer spending habits. To do so means irrelevance. I don't think Nintendo does this, and they likely do a lot of research. The Wii took everyone by surprise, including Nintendo, they had a good idea, and got lucky. But they hardly pushed the envelope of the gaming industry. If anything they brought to the forefront all those people who play those free-to-play games you disparage so much.
Looking at it objectively, it was Nintendo's own arrogance and refusal to adapt which cost them the first place spot in consoles in the first place. The N64 refused to go with an optical drive during a time when memory prices were ridiculously high and game sizes were booming, and when the GC tried to remedy this(with arguably better tech inside), they gimped the file size of the disc, especially compared to DVD.
So...tell me again...why is it the industry needs to adjust to Nintendo?
This happens sometimes, but at least these versions have new features.
Looking forward to Wonderful 101.
Glacier928: "Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper is a surprisingly deep for the hack-and-slash game it is. The story will take between 12-15 hours minimum to complete, with plenty of side-missions to unlock and tackle. The Musou Battlefields mode will add even more longevity for those who like to be creative and mix up their own versions of previous completed missions, and the new Duel Mode will provide for a solid amount of fun, whether local or co-op. While it has it’s technical issues, the game is still a great deal of fun, especially when co-oping. If you’ve never played a 'Warriors' game before, Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper is a solid one to grab. If you already own this for the PS3/360, then your double-dipping purchase will depend on how much you liked the game. Personally, I found myself enjoying the game more on the Wii U than the PS3…possibility due to the fact that I played a majority of it from my GamePad. Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper is a game that can provide for many hours of entertainment and still have you coming back for more."
Adam from DC writes: As a reviewer, for the most part, you are expected to finish a game before passing judgement. That considered, I did not want to finish Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper. It’s not that the game isn’t competent. It is. There are even moments of unabashed fun. It’s just that this poor little thing also happens to highlight the height of mediocrity.
