Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 5:35 PM
Mon Nov 23
44 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us: tips@kotaku.com
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
Email | AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
Email | AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
Email | AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/05/09
08/05/09
Yeah, because HD visuals, John Williams-sounding score, Euphoria, and Digital Molecular Matter really made The Force Unleashed a great game.
Face it, this game would have paled in comparison to Uncharted and probably even Tomb Raider: Underworld.
08/05/09
08/05/09
08/05/09
08/05/09
08/05/09
08/04/09
Really, Luke? Unseen64 says...
"In 2005, LucasArts announced a new Indiana Jones game for next-generation consoles. Originally scheduled for a release in 2007, the game saw constant delays as a result of internal struggles. Due to severe quality issues, it was decided to cancel the project in early 2009. Only externally developed versions for Wii, PS2, DS and PSP saw a release."
That doesn't sound like a "replacement" or "downgrade" to me - it sounds like every other multiplatform licensed game we've seen this generation, where there's similar 360 and PS3 versions, similar Wii and PS2 versions, and separate DS and PSP versions. The only difference here is that the 360 and PS3 versions never saw the light of day.
That also raises another question: if the game was canned for quality problems, is it really a bad thing if it wasn't released?
08/04/09
08/04/09
How much better is Transformers on Ps3/360 or the new GIJOE then the Wii version. Not really much one, just the others trick you into believing it's going to be good. It's like paying for a high class hooker. You still going to get crabs regardless.
08/04/09
08/04/09
08/04/09
08/04/09
08/04/09
judging by this very small amount of content I can tell that this game would have been a completely different experience than Staff of Kings and would have made everyone who played it happy with no complaints.
I mean, that's the impression I get when I see a game's protagonist hit in the face with an orange cylinder. once I see the ol' orangey-to-the-face (as I call it) I'm sold on a game's quality!
/super sarcasm turbo II HD remix
08/04/09
A couple of tech demo videos and suddenly everyone's wetting themselves over such an awesome game being canceled.
Wow did you see that video of Indy being dragged by a truck? Man it would've been sweet jamming X during that!
08/05/09
08/04/09
08/04/09
08/04/09
08/04/09
Nathan Drake is like a poor man's Indiana Jones.
And Lara Croft is a poor man's Nathan Drake.
08/04/09
Dude Uncharted had a more interesting plot than Indy 4
08/04/09
08/04/09
A lot better than most of the crap that hits the big screen these days.
Oops, didn't mean to promote this D:
08/04/09
08/04/09
I still can't believe that this got shitcanned.
08/04/09
Its mere EXISTENCE sucks away quality.There are games made for it and only it that could undoubtedly be worlds better on the other consoles.
Hopefully next gen nintendo actually puts out a console that meets current technical standards(current at the time of release.)
08/04/09
While I do think that quality, overall, is going to suffer, I don't think the Wii is completely devoid of quality. BloomBlox is great. Fire Emblem was a hell of a lot of fun. And I'm sure if they ever get around to another Pikmin, I bet I'll love it.
But yeah, overall, it's killing quality as developers look for the easy, quick cash in.
08/04/09
it's just that before you didn't have articles like this one framing a subpar game as an offensive act against certain pockets of gamers.
...welcome to "gaming journalism."
08/04/09
But there was never a console so good at attracting them. And there was never a console an entire generation behind in terms of power to make it that big of deal when a console gets a game instead of another.
08/04/09
The key difference between this and most bad games is that this was a potentially good game based on Indiana Jones that was canned so that they could make a bad game instead. If it hadn't been Indiana Jones or if there'd never been the potential for a really awesome one on other consoles, they wouldn't complain as much.
I think the issue with the Wii's lack of power isn't that the lack of power actually makes it harder to make a good game for it, but that companies use it as an excuse. Between the large number of non-games (or casual gamers or whatever you want to call them) with lower quality standards who own a Wii and the fact that it isn't as powerful, companies often feel (and, unfortunately, they may be correct to a certain degree) that they can get away with less on the Wii.
So many Wii ports are just stripped down versions of the 360/PS3 games with gratuitous motion control added, and that doesn't work. In order for a Wii game to be good, it needs to not just be designed with the controller in mind (it doesn't need to use motion control, but it needs to use it well if it does), but also the hardware in mind: you can't just try to design some epic HD game with hundreds of enemies on screen and then remove half the enemies and drop the resolution, but that's what a lot of game developers do. Even games that aren't ports still often feel like the developers just assumed that because the graphics aren't as good they can't be expected to make a good game.
08/04/09
This, this, THIS. Staff of Kings didn't suck because it was on Wii, it sucked because the devs made a crap game and said, "meh, good enough for Wii." My spider-sense is telling me that the canned 360/PS3 builds were probably no more fun to play than the Wii version.
So if all three versions were crap, why did they only cancel two?
08/04/09
The Wii version of the game is completely separate from the 360/PS3 version. The Wii version was developed externally, and had nothing to do with why the 360/PS3 was canceled.
08/05/09
Of course I'm exaggerating. But I wonder how far from the truth I am.
08/05/09
Sure, you can point to good games on the Wii. Being on inferior hardware doesn't automatically make for a bad game. The PS2 had good games. The PS1 had good games, the SNES had good games. But imagine how superior any of those good Wii games would have been had they had the increased capabilites of the better hardware.
It's kinda like painting. PS3/360/PC gives the developer a larger canvas with more colors in the palette. Wii gives the developer a smaller canvas and less colars. And sure, you can draw a black and white masterpiece on a postage stamp, but odds are you're gonna end up with something more impressive with the larger canvas with more colors, especially since you can still draw that postage stamp sized black and white masterpiece on it should you so choose.
08/05/09
that was perhaps the best counter-argument I've ever read on this website. well done.
I don't disagree with what you said.
my issue is this: despite the smaller canvas and fewer colors, there are GREAT games on the Wii!
(see: www.wiiaredeep.tk >>> Deep Games)
and what gets me is people pretend like they don't exist just because they aren't the cutting edge of technology.
and THAT makes these people appear like they are in it for "the euphoria engine" instead of the kick-ass Indy adventure.
graphics over fun.
specs over story.
escalation over innovation.
and that, to me, is just sad.
08/05/09
I think devs do use "it's on Wii" as an excuse to be lazy.
getting back to the main point for just a moment, that doesn't mean devs making this game for PS3/60 would have done any better a job with it.
and CERTAINLY not enough to merit the desperate enthusiasm of Luke Plunkett's ranting and raving above.
back to your points though. yes, I think some devs do cut corners on Wii versions of games. after all, ain't it funny how NINTENDO games always happen to be amazing? (Wii Music was just a poor idea.... regardless of execution).
but my issue is, for some reason, on the Wii, the crappy games get ALL the attention.
and games like Muramasa get articles like: "I hope this comes to PS3/60!"
and games like Madworld/HotD:O/Conduit get articles like: "these sales numbers are not awesome"
and games like RE: Umbrella Chronicles that are third party, high quality, fun and sold well, get mocked just because its "on rails."
... as if enjoyment were dependent purely on being trendy light gun games were huge not too long ago. so were fighting games. someday, the FPS will be passe. will you all be mocking Halo 3 then?
and games like deBlob which are third party, sold well, are fun and high quality get treated like they don't exist. case in point, deBlob was last mentioned on this site in November of '08.
where as the short coming of Dead Rising CTYD were mentioned in May '09 in the middle of an article where High Voltage was trying to say that they had achieved powerful stuff on the Wii.
08/05/09
Your idea that the Wii gives a "smaller canvas" is short-sighted. You act as though all systems are open for all companies to make games for. As though the Wii's entry fee for them were the same, but it simply isn't. And seriously, be reasonable. "You can still draw that same postage stamp?" Okay, I would love to see what people would think of a game built as though it were for the Wii, with the same budget as a Wii game (a serious serious effort here), but on the 360. It'd be abandoned. No one would pay attention. Your argument is completely over-reaching and an unrealistic way to even begin to look at the Wii.
The Wii fills the gap the PS2 is slowly leaving as its games slow to a crawl.
Also, just because you have access to greater technology that does not mean that you must use it or that it's instantly better. You can look all over comics for proof of that.
08/05/09
08/05/09
08/05/09
08/05/09
From what I understand, the actual price of the physical hardware required to make games for the 3 systems, once assistance from the Nintendo/Sony/MS are taken into account, (IIRC they all have small developer assistance programs) is relatively similar. The only difference in "entry fee" would be the cost of actual development of the games... presumably the higher quality assets one would expect for a ps3/360 game. Therefor, one would understand that what you seem to be saying is that a really good game for ps3/360 with only Wii quality assets will curl up and die. And, now maybe this is true. But isn't that then implying that graphics/glitz really ARE extremely important? And thus Wii is that much less of a quality system?
I'd also like to point out, that making a Wii quality game for the other systems would actually be *significantly* easier (and thus less expensive) than making it for the actual Wii. At the very least you can afford to be way sloppier with your memory budget as you aren't trying to fit it all in as small a footprint. (One of the reasons why I suspect Disgaia and some other games are on PS3. Sure, they could probably have fit it all on PS2/Wii, but why take the time/effort? And Disgaia didn't exactly do all that badly... and it wasn't exactly state of the art ps3 graphics.)
And I actually would be extremely interested in seeing a game come out, exactly identical, for the Wii, Ps3, 360, PC, etc. It would give us a nice baseline conversion for Wii quality vs. PS3 quality vs 360 quality. Considering the difference in hardware quality, saying Wii got "XXX" 90+ rated games, while PS3 got "XX" 90+ rated games, doesn't really mean much, if, as you say, people are simply expecting much more from ps3/360/pc games.
08/05/09
It's all completely ridiculous.
08/05/09
It's posts like that that make me go "Why am I trying to go into the gaming industry? Then these spoiled little twits are going to sign my paychecks!"
Then I remember the spoiled little twits are a shrinking but vocal minority and people who like to have fun just don't post on sites like this. The shrill shrieking drowns out the reasoned discussion.