I think there's an interesting question here... As a game critic, should they take the hardware into consideration for their final score? It seems like different critics do this to different degrees and it has a large effect on their games scores. It seems like the most consistent criticism of the Conduit is the generic story and gameplay, but this is being compared to the library of available games on all systems. However, when looking at this game in the context of the Wii library, it is a unique game that fills a previously empty niche. Can a story be generic if it's the only one of its kind?
Anyone who counts fps as a favorite genre is very unlikely to turn to the Wii as their first console choice, so there's the question of who is this game for? The main market for this is likely those that only own a Wii (who therefore don't play a lot of fps), and those who may have previously avoided fps due to the high learning curve of the controls. Will these people get much out a review from someone who regularly plays games like Halo, MGS, COD, etc? This goes back to the argument commonly made with casual games. Is it responsible for seasoned, core gamers to review casual genres that they wouldn't otherwise go near?
Then again, it's not the hardware that prevented a quality storytelling and creative design. There are probably a lot of core gamers out there that would be interested to see what the motion controls can bring to their favorite genre, but only of the game itself is a worthy experience to tear them away from their PS3 or Xbox 360. Obviously this game isn't.
So where should the bias lie in the final score? I guess this is why Kotaku does their reviews the way they do, which I like. But, scores are much more widely referenced and accepted, and so it's an important consideration. As a consumer, I would prefer that the reviewer is considering the product in the context of who would actually use it, so I would tend to think that they should consider the Wii market first. After all, it doesn't seem like a lot of Xbox 360 fanboys were waiting on pins and needles for this game.
@anabbeynormality: I think it depends on if they do it even handedly. Do PS3/360 shooters get their controls/graphics compared to the Wii or PC? I think for the most part they don't. I don't particularly like joysticks for FPS, so the conduit has some of the best console FPS controls I've played. The graphics are bad no matter how you cut it though, but I'd chalk that up more to their art direction than the hardware limitations. I think you see the "for a wii game" because the 360/PS3 are so similar. If you'd had two console lines go the wii route, I suspect we'd be seeing alot more "game X controls well..for a Y game", and it would be implicit that systems' notY's graphics are compared to each other not system Y.
@Oliver Wilson: That's an interesting point. It's fairly common for a Wii game to be compared with the 360 and PS3, but it usually doesn't work the other way around (the one recent exception I can think of is Ghostbusters). In the context of FPS, I think that this is because the dual-analog controls are considered to be the de facto controls and are therefore the benchmark. Also, the consumer base is likely to be more in line with professional reviewers so there's less of a need to step outside of that reference point.
I'm sure as Natal and the PS3 motion controllers come out, there will be a lot of comparisons to the Wii and how games take advantage of the controls. It will be interesting to see. If they are able to execute motion controls well for fps in their flagship titles, The Conduit won't have much of a leg to stand on.
@Crash__Man: Do you object to them using the Giant Bomb review? I'm glad they included it in this instance, to provide balance. I think the point of these frankenreviews is so that you can get the gist of 5 or 6 valid, well reasoned reviews without having to read them all yourself. There wouldn't be any point to these things if the selection of reviews wasn't an accurate cross section of the variety of published opinions, so it makes sense to include the Giant Bomb review as a dissenting opinion to those who reviewed it more favorably.
Basically everything that is deemed good about this game is given the modifier "for a Wii title." If it were on any other console the reviews would be damning across the board.
@TheGuitarsonist: It's almost as if Nintendo did that on purpose.
The same thing happened for Madworld. "OMG Blood and guts on the Wii! What an innovation!" Meanwhile the other 2/3 of the console gaming community are curb stomping bishes like Edward Norton and blowing limbs of Necromorphs with wild abandon.
@Sl0th: MadWorld is more of a standout title than this. At least it had great style, and was very fun to play. You heard people without Wiis wishing it was on the PS3/360. You don't hear much about that with The Conduit because, while the Wii controls may be great, it seems to just be a standard FPS otherwise.
@TheGuitarsonist: Is it fair to hold Wii games to the same standards as the PS3/360?
On the one hand, both "types" of titles cost - at least - $50. That is not chump change, and there are certain expectations from a full-priced product.
On the other hand, it seems a bit unreasonable to expect that level of quality from a machine that cannot match the others and with devs that did not (and, apparently, will not) prepare for it. It is almost a chicken-and-egg problem.
Ugh, I can't get over the box art. I guess next time they should actually hire an art director. Maybe a writer too while they're at it. Still, I see this as more of a tech demo of what the Wii is capable of. Hopefully, someone takes advantage of their control scheme and make something "truly great."
@NeVeRMoRe666: With that said, I haven't actually tried the game -disclaimer- so I might just pick it up anyway. More games like this, like we were shown when the Wii was first advertised, what with the shooting and such in the early wii commercials. I'm surprised not more companies have tried to use the Wiimote like a gun, sword ect.
@NeVeRMoRe666: I'm liking this game a lot on the base of the controls and the online play that is working as good as one can hope so (voice chat, no lag, incredibly quick matchmaking)...
But i'm right there with you that the art is so absolutly generic that it hinders the game. I love the weapons and how they are handled, but i just can't bring myself to care about the characters or the enviropment surrounding them.
One of the very few games on the Wii that looked interesting to me. The reviews are too sporadic to really get an idea of whether this game is actually good or bad. Granted I no longer own a Wii..but still...this one looked promising, still not sure if its actually good or bad. I'll just wait for the Kotaku review I guess.
@tehdorkz: Actually, it's already out, unless you live in the past, in which case I wave at you through the temporal warp that allows you to also view the present. They gave it good marks for controls and multiplayer and less than stellar marks for the bland story, AI, voice-acting, and textures.
Sounds like it's a little premature to be showing this title to any members of the gaming press, but I have faith in High Voltage to live up to their promises.
@SaanZ: I don't know why people try to make realistic looking wii games. The hardware isn't up to the PS3/360/PC levels so to most gamers it's not going to be appealing. There are many different graphics styles that would have worked and made this game seem more appealing instead it's 100% miss.
07/02/09
Anyone who counts fps as a favorite genre is very unlikely to turn to the Wii as their first console choice, so there's the question of who is this game for? The main market for this is likely those that only own a Wii (who therefore don't play a lot of fps), and those who may have previously avoided fps due to the high learning curve of the controls. Will these people get much out a review from someone who regularly plays games like Halo, MGS, COD, etc? This goes back to the argument commonly made with casual games. Is it responsible for seasoned, core gamers to review casual genres that they wouldn't otherwise go near?
Then again, it's not the hardware that prevented a quality storytelling and creative design. There are probably a lot of core gamers out there that would be interested to see what the motion controls can bring to their favorite genre, but only of the game itself is a worthy experience to tear them away from their PS3 or Xbox 360. Obviously this game isn't.
So where should the bias lie in the final score? I guess this is why Kotaku does their reviews the way they do, which I like. But, scores are much more widely referenced and accepted, and so it's an important consideration. As a consumer, I would prefer that the reviewer is considering the product in the context of who would actually use it, so I would tend to think that they should consider the Wii market first. After all, it doesn't seem like a lot of Xbox 360 fanboys were waiting on pins and needles for this game.
07/02/09
07/02/09
I'm sure as Natal and the PS3 motion controllers come out, there will be a lot of comparisons to the Wii and how games take advantage of the controls. It will be interesting to see. If they are able to execute motion controls well for fps in their flagship titles, The Conduit won't have much of a leg to stand on.
07/02/09
cuz I know that GiantBomb score is by far the lowest one out there for this game.
and I know that the MAJORITY of reviews I've seen have this game in the low-mid 8s / 10.
07/02/09
07/02/09
I object to Jeff reviewing Wii games... he hate the console.
The guy gave ZELDA a 8/10
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
Reminds me a bit of Nintendo Power back in the day, rating everything great.
07/02/09
07/02/09
The same thing happened for Madworld. "OMG Blood and guts on the Wii! What an innovation!" Meanwhile the other 2/3 of the console gaming community are curb stomping bishes like Edward Norton and blowing limbs of Necromorphs with wild abandon.
07/02/09
07/02/09
On the one hand, both "types" of titles cost - at least - $50. That is not chump change, and there are certain expectations from a full-priced product.
On the other hand, it seems a bit unreasonable to expect that level of quality from a machine that cannot match the others and with devs that did not (and, apparently, will not) prepare for it. It is almost a chicken-and-egg problem.
07/02/09
It is in terms of the gameplay it should be an even standard.
For the graphics maybe not, complaining its not in HD would be stupid, but the Wii is capable of a lot better than most games have shows.
Nintendo's games look good.
Okami looks good.
No More Heroes looks good.
even last gen Starfox adventures, the Tales games, Black, FFXII, ANY LEVEL 5 GAME!!!
that reminds to rant about porting Dragon Quest VIII, Rougue Galaxy, FFXII, and Kingdom Hearts to the Wii...
07/04/09
07/04/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
But i'm right there with you that the art is so absolutly generic that it hinders the game. I love the weapons and how they are handled, but i just can't bring myself to care about the characters or the enviropment surrounding them.
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
ಠ_à²
07/02/09
._.
*cricket sounds*
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
06/09/09
Beyond that, it sounds like Punch-Out meets brutality.
06/08/09
Heh, at least she'll stop wasting my herbs...
06/08/09
06/08/09
also:
the idea of a virtual stamina bar in a game which requires real physical activity seems redundant…
06/09/09
06/08/09
06/08/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
Is copper the new grey and brown?
05/28/09