Most annoying ignorant comments

divine_madness said:
Going to all that effort to prove FFXII had poor sales was a bit silly when you used data pretty much all cited to be 'as of March 2006' which means it's little wonder a game only released in March 2006 is going to have somewhat poor sales figures...

Yes because having a look at the wiki is so much effort.
To be honest, i didn't look at the dates of the sources. The US one is sales up until the end of 2006 so that is fairly recent, it is only the Jap numbers that will be lower and as i said it excludes the EU anyhow.

Even looking at the sales figures posted by msmalls, 5m units is pretty poor for a game that is so hyped up.
I'm not arguing whether it is a good game or not but i was hugely surprised at how few units it sold considering how it is talked about. I am pretty surprised over all how low total game sales are for a lot of the big titles.
 
Needles said:
wii is a next gen console.....lol ;)

Heh, I've got one but that still made me chuckle.

I can't get my girlfriend playing PGR or Fight Night but she will play Wii Sports, the mini games in Sonic and even Streets of Rage! so Nintendo are doing okay in my book.
 
WatchTower said:
It's a good job Nintendo do try new things isn't it. If it wasn't for them things would never change. Things would become so boring.
If something works and is the best way to do something then there is no need to change.

Cars for example have always had a steering wheel and pedals because that is the best way of controlling a car. It has been like that for a hundred years. You don't change something which works perfectly well, especially to something which works less well. Change for change's sake is not progress.
 
What defines next-gen ? To a vast majority it appears to be graphics. To others, it's a complete change of pace, ala the Wii. The most apparent trait of a new console arrival is the improvements in graphics quality, which is why people appear 'confused' about the Wii, and often dismiss it as not quite so next gen, despite the Wii having the most advanced form of control, and dare I say it, playability.

To me, next gen is simply the arrival of a new round of consoles.
 
dirtydog said:
If something works and is the best way to do something then there is no need to change.

Cars for example have always had a steering wheel and pedals because that is the best way of controlling a car. It has been like that for a hundred years. You don't change something which works perfectly well, especially to something which works less well. Change for change's sake is not progress.

Power steering
Fly-by-wire
Automatic gear boxes
Close ratio gear boxes
Tiptronic gear change
Cruise control

All of these improvement and changes to the traditional steering wheel and pedals have been made.
The Wii still has a control pad that you hold in your hand and can press button on (the steering wheel and pedals) but it incorporates new technology to improve the functionality of the control system.
It is not a change for changes sake. It is an attempt to improve functionality and innovate in a stagnant area of video games. It inherently changes the way some games are played.
Whether it is better or not is down to personal preference (much like automatic gearboxes and tiptronic changes). That does not change the fact that it is an innovative concept and should be applauded by everyone that is in to gaming because it widens the appeal, increases games market presence to the wider audience and offers something inherently new.
 
KNiVES said:
What defines next-gen ? To a vast majority it appears to be graphics. To others, it's a complete change of pace, ala the Wii. The most apparent trait of a new console arrival is the improvements in graphics quality, which is why people appear 'confused' about the Wii, and often dismiss it as not quite so next gen, despite the Wii having the most advanced form of control, and dare I say it, playability.

To me, next gen is simply the arrival of a new round of consoles.

I agree. Generations have always been decided by the time of arrival, hence the use of the word "generation". In the past, it has always included graphical advancements because hat is how the companies differentiated the product from their last one.
If we are purely going on graphics then the 360 and PS3 are already last generation because PCs can output at far higher resolutions and are already more powerful. Give it a year and the gap will be larger still.
 
Games companies use next-gen as a meaningless buzzword. Kind of like Web 2.0 and stuff like that.
 
Kamakazie! said:
Power steering
Fly-by-wire
Automatic gear boxes
Close ratio gear boxes
Tiptronic gear change
Cruise control

All of these improvement and changes to the traditional steering wheel and pedals have been made.
The Wii still has a control pad that you hold in your hand and can press button on (the steering wheel and pedals) but it incorporates new technology to improve the functionality of the control system.
It is not a change for changes sake. It is an attempt to improve functionality and innovate in a stagnant area of video games. It inherently changes the way some games are played.
Whether it is better or not is down to personal preference (much like automatic gearboxes and tiptronic changes). That does not change the fact that it is an innovative concept and should be applauded by everyone that is in to gaming because it widens the appeal, increases games market presence to the wider audience and offers something inherently new.
I didn't mention gearboxes. The other changes are largely transparent to the driver. The fact is that in 2007 we steer a car with a round wheel just like they did in 1900. The Wii's controller is a complete change from a conventional pad. I disagree that something should be applauded automatically because it is 'innovative'. Sometimes - perhaps most often - the simplest and oldest designs work the best.
 
dirtydog said:
If something works and is the best way to do something then there is no need to change.

Cars for example have always had a steering wheel and pedals because that is the best way of controlling a car. It has been like that for a hundred years. You don't change something which works perfectly well, especially to something which works less well. Change for change's sake is not progress.


works less well for you. not so for those millions of people who have never bothered to get into gaming before but are now enjoying a go, however casual on the wii.

the wiimote is by no means the final evolution in controller methods but just because you don't like it doesn't mean that it isn't better. Time will tell which has the staying power but i think sixaxis being introduced coupled with the fact that the wii has immediately attracted people from generations who weren't interested in gaming says something.

To the people that are enjoying playing the wii an innovative control method is far more important than having a game that runs at a constant 60fps.
 
If something has been dumbed down to appeal to the 'masses' (read: non-gamers) that might be fine for Nintendo shareholders but it isn't for the rest of us who want decent games to play with proper controllers.
 
dirtydog said:
If something has been dumbed down to appeal to the 'masses' (read: non-gamers) that might be fine for Nintendo shareholders but it isn't for the rest of us who want decent games to play with proper controllers.
Don't buy a Wii then. I happen to agree with you about the controller but thats why I sold my Wii and now stick to PC/PS3 and 360.
 
so again you just don't like the controller personally.

I think it's alright, i enjoy my warioware, wiisports, and zelda etc. I also like the traditional controller which I use for my 360 but again it's that snobbishness of 'proper gamers' like the traditional controller instead of realising that gaming should be just fun and inclusive. if you don't like it then fair play to you but it's hardly fair to categorise the people who agree with you as 'gamers' whereas those who don't must be 'non-gamers'.

*edit well in my opinion gaming should be fun and inclusive other people might want it to be other things.

correcting myself there, because the comment about gaming should be fun and inclusive sounds ridiculous as obviously that's what gaming is about and lot's of people find the 360 and ps3 meet these needs of course it's those 'masses' and of course some other gamers that i was referring to.
 
Last edited:
I think you missed the point to my comment. Whilst I agree about not personally liking the Wii controller I would not say that it's a bad thing because quite obviously millions of people do like it. My point was more to say that if somebody doesn't like the Wii controller then they should avoid buying a Wii and stick to the controller they do like. There are lots of popular things in gaming which I dont like so I avoid them, but that doesn't make them bad.
 
sorry mate wasn't replying to you, you've tried the wii and didn't find it to your taste so got rid of it which is perfectly reasonable and sensible.
 
It used to get my goat when the fanboys would try and break down the PS3 to make the gargantuan asking price seem edible.

Now, I own the PS3 but I used to laugh when they'd break it down like this:

£180 for next-gen games console with Cell CPU
£200 for BluRay player
£20 for wireless controller
£24.99 for wireless b/g connectivity
 
ScarySquirrel said:
WatchTower said:
You know the idiotic comments such has these for example. I'm sure you have seen many more from peoples replys on youtube videos and so on.



1) The Dreamcast and Saturn failed because they had rubbish games.

2) The DS's touch screen and the Wii's motion sensor are gimmicks.

3) Nintendo are Kiddish.

4) Sony copy off everyone else.

5) The Xbox was too big.

6) Zelda is an RPG.


Those kind of comment for some reason make me want to punch something. :D Let me know what comments fizz you off.

Missed one!

Hoho :p
 
Back
Top Bottom