Print

[Pheidias]

We can probably debate all this forever. You should make it clear that its in you oppinion, when you debate stuff. Oblivion plays flawlessly without any loading time on the pc with all the mods out for the PC version you acctually have a version that is vastly superior to the 360 version with smaller text, color maps, better water better textures, I can go on forever everything is better. The only advantage the 360 version has is its sound and the fact that its easier to play from the couch.

Oh and how good a AAA title is isn't what makes it a AAA title. But honestly AAA is the worst made up word ever, I apologize for bringing it to the table.

So everygame that starts its production on another system is credited to that system? then Halo isn't a xbox game? So on this TP business lets agree to disagree since we apperently have very different oppinions on what classifies for a game for a system.

[Foe-hammer]

I agree with the PC's oblivion graphic patches, such as the increased distant texture mod that makes the environment background look much better, making a difference.  That is the one mod that sways me to play it on the pc.  But without any loading times?  BS.  Even on a x1900xtx 512 crossfire there is loading times when you go into dungeons, towns, etc., and when traveling in the outside loading is still noticeable (albeit much less noticeable then the 360's version).  So don’t go and try to pull one over on me.  I do enjoy playing oblivion more on the 360, because of the better control and command layout.  The PC’s control for oblivion is just not as intuitive as it is on the 360’s controller.  Curious, what are your pc's specs?

Then what is the definition of an 'AAA' title?  Those that sell very well?  Those that have an average score on all reviews in the mid 90's?  Then if that is the case, resistance is not one.  Zelda and GoW, yes.  R6:vegas, possibly.

My point about Zelda:TP is that is was developed for the GC from start to finish, and always was planned for the GC.  It was just dumped to the Wii so that the console would have one good game.  It graphically is the exact same game as it is for the GC.  Nothing was enhanced for the Wii.  Understand?

[Pheidias]

For instance once upon a time every game released from blizzard where considered AAA.

The wii version is widescreen...

For it to acctually count as you say then it should have just been released for the cube but with support for the new controller if you played it on the wii.

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE(Pheidias @ Jan 1 2007, 01:05 PM)

For instance once upon a time every game released from blizzard where considered AAA.

The wii version is widescreen...

For it to acctually count as you say then it should have just been released for the cube but with support for the new controller if you played it on the wii.

I mentioned previously that the only difference was widescreen support and the use of the wand.  The added widescreen is nice, but when nothing else is added graphically it does not cut it.  And imo the Wii wand doesn't work that well with the game; it noticeably was not made with it in mind in the first place.

For it to be considered a Wii system seller game, there needs to be more then just widescreen and wand support added.  For those who have the Gamecube, like myself, there is no way on earth i'd pick up the Wii for zelda:TP, when pretty much the exact same game is available for the cube.

[Pheidias]

True that if you have the cube I wouldn't invest in the wii for zelda. But if I had the wii and the cube, I'd buy the wii version. And I'm pretty sure that even though there are almost 10x as many cube owners the wii version will sell better then the cube

[incognegro]

Foe Hammer, I thought I was the only one that felt that way about zelda, you hit the nail right on the head ( I wasn't trying to make a hammer reference). Even if you dont have a cube or a wii its still cheaper to buy the cube version. Thats what I did. When the wii actually gets some titles Ill enjoy, just sell the cube/zelda as a bundle on ebay

[BTAKasper]

I tried to download this game about 3 times before i gave up.  When i tried it was most likely considered peak times when alot of people were home downloading it as well.  The first 3 times when i started several minutes would go by before moving up 1%.  So i waited until about 2:30 am and then the game took off, downloading it in about 30 minutes.  Overall im very impressed with the level of detail in this game, seriously i thought all these cars looked extremely realistic, but thats nothing new to the older Gran Turismo titles.  

I've noticed one thing the ps3 online service does need, or maybe it does but i just didnt figure it out.  It should allow downloads to move to the background while you surf other games like the 360 marketplace does, also if you cancel a download why not allow resuming like the 360 also.  thats a whole different topic though.

Game was fun overall!  

[VariableElite]

QUOTE(heartofalion @ Jan 12 2007, 11:13 PM)

i think all the xbox fanboi's need to chill out. You guys are bashing the shit out of a system that isnt that old, its still in its infancy. The 360 didnt have didly shit at launch, and it had its share of issues too. M$ has smoothed those out though, but they've had a year to do it, give sony a chance.

Anyway i have to agree about the network sucking ass right now. Its funny ill start demo downloads and then while they are downloading play my 360. I kinda regret buying my ps3 without crap for launch titles, the only one i would consider getting is NFS carbon but i already have it for my 360. I plan on dling that tech demo tonight while i sleep.

But as i said, xbox fanboys lay off. This is sony's first attempt at an online community, i doubt live was orgasmic when it launched. (i wouldnt know i didnt own an xbox until like 6 months ago). I mean every thread i go into you guys are just tearing the ps3 apart, give it some time. If its still crap in 1 year ok i understand ripping on it but give it a chance.

True, it's a new console, but Sony's had a year of watching the 360 grow to understand what gamers think is important, and they've apparently wasted it.

Your argument doesn't take into account how much more Live with have developed over the time it takes Sony to match its current features. If Sony had been smart, they could have been very close to Live at launch, and even innovated some stuff on their own. As it stands, they will spend the rest of this generation playing catch-up when it comes to online gaming, barring some freak occurrence.