Okies, resolution issues aside for a moment;

As a Biohazard fan, i already own all the PSX, PS2 and GC titles in their original Japanese releases, and also every UK Resident Evil release.. so after some comparisons, this is my personal opinion:-

The Wii release is definatly the ultimate Biohazard 4 experience. Dont be put off by those complaining about no graphical upgrades. What you're getting is a combanation of all whats best in the other versions available. You get the superior graphics of the gamecube edition, plus all the extras of the PS2 version. You also (if you like this sort of thing) get the wiimote controls as a bonus (although, call me old fashioned, i prefer using a pad for Biohazard games, lol) so, *and again, this is just my opinion* for the ultimate Biohazard 4 experience, this is what i recommend;

Wii console, connected with standard wii lead (not component) to a flatscreen CTR/rear projection TV (not a HDTV, or 1080i upscaler) with the wii edition of the game, and for those uncertain of the wii controls, just add a gamecube controller :)

*BUT* (huge but here)

For those of you, like myself, who own HDTV's... if you are a PS3 owner, to be honest, save yourself a lotta trouble and get the PS2 release. Reason? You get all the content same as the wii, and although the ps2 version suffers graphically compared to the gamecube and wii versions due to the PS2's hardware, because the PS3 has an upscaler, when you choose the option to remove the smoothing, and upscale to full screen, i found that a had an experience 'more pleasing to the eye' then when i tried running the wii version. Again, this only really applies to HD users ;) Hope this was of some help :-) (PS; yeah, i'm having to eat humble pie and buy another wii due to the release of Biohazard: Umbrella Chronicles, haha)

Autolycus

trmn8r

trmn8r

No one has ever scammed a group of people like Nintendo did with the Wii. It actually hurts me to watch. "Casual" gaming? How about BEING SCAMMED? If Nintendo was so into casual gaming, the console would cost $25-$99. Period. Not a cent more. And it would come with 2 of those gimmicky controllers, as it is called the "Wii" not the "i".

If Nintendo doesn't lose this console war, gaming as most of us know it is over. Forever. I've never wanted a console to fail more than I want to see the last-last-gen Nintendo Wii fail. Thankfully, I feel that by Christmas 2008 the Nintendo Wii will be a joke along the lines of the "Pet Rock," only more pathetic and laughable.

Sloopydrew

You appear to be a deluded fanboy. Nintendo didn't provide third-party developers the POWER to make games look significantly better (or even slightly better) than the GameCube. Until the Wii I was a HUGE Nintendo fan. But things have changed. Nintendo has changed. They are charging NEXT-GEN prices for what is clearly a LAST-GEN console and the third-party developers are doing the best they can when working with 20th century technology.

Sloopydrew

"It's a port of a game first released on a last gen console, are we really surprised the graphics are last gen also?"

Please, rbernard, can you find me a game that DOESN'T look "last-gen" on the Wii? I'd like to believe that there's a reason we paid $250 for this console and last-gen graphics and a gimmicky controller aren't the answer. So, really, if you can find a game that looks BETTER than the GameCube that is currently released on the Wii, I will never say another negative thing about the Wii again.

Sloopydrew

No. It's Nintendo's fault they made a crap console with technology that's nearly a decade old. I'm not going to blame third-parties for Nintendo playing it EXTREMELY cheap while charging WAY TOO MUCH.

Sloopydrew

When it comes to re-releasing an old game on a whole new console, inovative gameplay just doesn't cut it in my eyes.

DrunkenNinja12

That being said, I have no doubt we'll see great looking Wii games.

dowingba

Poita

i thought that it was random between that and getting sawed in the head. is there a way to trigger one over the other?

seanyostyle

crck

1. Ninja Gaiden Sigma is 42 bucks higher that xbox version. BAD (RE4 is only 10 bucks more)

2. RE4 has new control scheme. Good (Ninja Gaiden does not)(sidenote: sixaxis sucks)

3. PS3 sucks for games period and has pretty much no exclusive games compared to Wii or 360 (makes good blu-ray player thats it).

Oh, and by the way, RE4 is one of the best games ever! And if you ever try to say that PS3 is better than Wii I will always mention Super Smash Bros Brawl. Wii60 all the way

trmn8r

crck

Rabish12

how are people not getting it... its a bad port of a good game.

1. if your port comes out two years after the original and nothing has been added, thats a bad port

2. if your port comes out 10 bucks more then the currently available versions and all you have is a new control scheme, thats a bad port

3. if the graphics havent been tweaked really in any way (widescreen support was added in the ps2 version) and you are porting to a new generation, thats a bad port.

by comparison: Ninja gaiden Sigma
1. lots of new content, weapons, characters and costumes have been added. Thats a good port
2. The price has increased but theres new stuff (60 bucks still seems high, should be 50)
3. The graphics have been significantly overhauled since it has been moved to a new generation of console.

Asharak

Hylian-Hero

that was the only problem with the gamecube version

SquirrelPhister

That's the whole thing. I bought a Wii for a NEW gaming experience....I didn't want anything that would come CLOSE to the gaming experience found on the 360 or the PS3.

I already own a 360 and I love it (and Live too). You buy a Wii for a unique experience, and that's what you get.

That said, I feel sorry for anyone who ONLY has a Wii, because the 3rd party support sucks (but it's only been 6 months) and this "cram a bunch of minigames together and charge $50 for it" shit has to STOP (but again, it's only been 6 months).

Billkwando

That doesn't make it a BAD port. That just makes it a port. What law dictates that a "port" needs to be anything other the game it was ported from? So if it had VMU minigames would that make it a "good" port by your definition?

Billkwando

D00mM4r1n3

Not that this has much to do with RE4 except that the conversation drifted to Wii redemption when we finally get Wii games this fall that justify the system.

kasplat

Thomaticus

trmn8r

trmn8r

trmn8r

Nintendo themselves never said that the graphics would every be anything than about twice as powerful as a gamecube...and they were pretty vague even then. That said, you are correct. It is clear that no one, including Nintendo themselves (they should be ashamed of Mario Party 8, for example), has really shown any reason to think the Wii is even THAT powerful.

However, I expect that to change. Gears of War wasn't a launch title, either. I think we'll see things differently after Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid 3, Final Fantasy CC: Crystal Bearers, Umbrella Chronicles and others start hitting the shelves. Up until now, we've only seen crappy ports and rush-jobs...I think that's going to change, and this holiday season is when we'll start to see that occur.

Remember what the early Xbox games looked like? Splinter Cell and Halo were the games that changed what was, until that point, a pretty lackluster console full of PS2 ports. I expect the Wii will do the same.

WizarDru

NoMoreTrolls

Just because something is at a higher resolution, or running at a higher framerate, doesn't make it better graphics.

I'll grant that Gears looks pretty fantastic, although they stole the artstyle from RE4 anyway.

dowingba

How, exactly? Did the hardcore gamer suddenly stop getting catered to? Looking at the upcoming lineup for the 360 and PS3, that hardly seems the case. Or is it your fear that the Wii's success is going to move developers from the 360/PS3 to develop more games on the Wii...and that somehow this will result in all games being poor mini-game collections? Then vote with your dollars...because developers go where the money is. Just ask EA and Ubisoft. Super Mario Galaxy isn't going to stop games like Metal Gear Solid 4, God of War III or Gears of War II from being made...unless the market rejects them.

But the contention that Nintendo is somehow going to destroy the video-game market is nothing short of ludicrous. Did Nintendo make developer release a dozen different WWII FPS games in the last couple of years? Did Nintendo force developers to create derivative FPS after derivative movie license after derivative GTA-clone? I don't think so.

And some might argue that video games were much more interesting 6 or 7 years ago...you know, when Silent Hill, Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear Solid, Perfect Dark, Tony Hawk Pro Skater, Super Smash Brothers, Soul Calibur and Crazy Taxi were all NEW.

WizarDru

Really. Quick quiz....who just posted a 1.9 Billion dollar loss last quarter? Who posted a loss of $315 million for the same period? Now who had to restate their earnings upwards for the that period. Financially weak? Quite the opposite. Nintendo ONLY does games, so they HAVE to make a reasonable profit. They don't have a movie, music, hardware or software empire to help them prop up the business during a lull. They have to hit their numbers every time. That's not a discussion of the relative quality of their consoles...it's a simple statement of financials.

You think Matushsita is massively bigger than Sony? Matsushita's market capitalization is only $45 billion versus Sony's $56 billion. Sony's valuation currently stands at $62 billion, over Matsushita's $44 billion. I'm not sure how you come to the idea that Sony is so much smaller than them, when the opposite is true....unless you're only comparing Sony's game business against the whole of Matsushita, which makes little sense.

The discussion of the Wii's graphics misses a critical point: many of Ninty's customers simply don't care. Look at the sales for the Virtual Console and XBLA. People are paying for 20+ year old games. The people buying Zelda II aren't buying it for the graphics...but they ARE buying it. That doesn't mean people don't notice the graphics...but Wii Sports shows that gameplay can trump graphics, as long as the graphics are good enough to do the job.

Re-issuing RE4 for the Wii is a NO-BRAINER. RE4 sold 1.6 million copies on the Gamecube and 2 million on the PS2. That means that it sold 3.6 million total to an installed base of 21 million 'Cube owners and 116+ million PS2 owners. As of now, the Wii has sold nearly 8 million units: that's a little over a third of the cube's installed base in a little over six months. Think about that for a minute. Now, Capcom has a game that is arguably features the best graphics on the Gamecube, and is hoping to sell to a lot of people who passed on the gamecube or RE4 last time around. That just plain smart, and will become smarter with each passing month of Wii sales.

WizarDru

PaulMorel

This was one of the best, if not THE BEST game of last generation. It was even somewhat innovative; now everyone has interactive cutscenes, but this was the first game I played that really used them well.

PaulMorel

This is for the people who did not play it at first or those that absolutly love the game and want the extras and the new control scheme.

I don't see why you are whining..

skobar

rbernard80

Aside from that, put up a comparison of the Cube vs. PC versions so we actually have a bad port to scrutinize.

cmo

meggymoo

Hard to compare a blank screen because it locked up your computer.

PapaBear434

The Wii aiming controls are really good, a step up over the sluggish analog stick and laser pointer. The bonus Mr Waddaya-buyin' merchant shooting range bits are really easy to top on the first try. Other than that there's just some random waggle motions that replace button taps in the original.

doobymoo

Jambosive

Koneesha

Stop with the nitnendo hating and use your brain.If nitnendo does do this then sony and microsoft could be in trouble because then you could ahve a console with great graphics and wii control.

So stop bashing nintendo and use your brains for once. Nitnendo is in the perfect position.

majortom1981

Come on look at smash brothers brawl, metroid prime 3, Super Mario galaxy.

Dont blame nintendo for 3rd party lazyness.

Dont sit here and bash the wii. You knew that the wii wouldnt be as pwoerfull at the other two. So dont bash nitnendo for your mistake and 3rd party lazy ness.

At the least the wii is capable of better textures then the wii and some stuff in hardware that was done in software on the cube.

majortom1981

To be honest (and I NEVER thought I'd type this), if Nintendo keeps dragging down the gaming environment, I hope they bow out of the console market (excluding handheld). Go third-party like Sega only, unlike Sega, keep making great games. Unless they're going to keep up on the HARDWARE side of things (like they always did, prior to this joke known as the Wii), Nintendo is only going to drag everyone else down and set the industry back 6 or 7 years. There is nothing -- not even Wii Sports -- on the Wii that comes CLOSE to the gaming experience found on the 360 or the PS3. And if the 360 or the PS3 add true Wii-Like controls, the Wii is over and so is Nintendo. I look at this console as their last "hurrah" and their last grasp at mega-cash before going third-party. I hate to say this, but I am starting to despise the Wii and, if Target takes it back, I will return it and stick with the PS3 and 360. At $50 - $99 I'd be fine with it (that is absolutely all it's worth), but don't sell me a $250 console that pisses on my electronics collection and tell me its raining.

Sloopydrew

Some good points dude. But, although it's true that Nintendo have had phenomenal sucess witht the Wii (limited only by their own lowballing of homw many consoles would sell, again a sign of their being over cautious when it comes to financial investments) . . . they will rightly see the sucess of the wii as a surprise attack that can only be pulled off once (like pearl Harbour he he).
It's very true that you can't buy innovation. But you can buy the innovative people. Nintendoes biggest assest is it's in house dev culture. Not just he biggies like Miyamoto but there must be hudnreds or maybe thousands of unsung heroes slaving away too.
Next time around Nintendo will have to do something totally radical to keep the innovation edge cause they sure arn't gonna try to compete graphics wise.
I'm glad the Wii is doing wel and also the DS but i see the big N bowing out of the console race after the Wii. In fact, the Wii its self will only look more and more archaic by say 2009 after a bunch of 2nd and 3rd gen 360 and PS3 titles are on the shelf. Most people will have a 'Wii and one of the others' by that time so Nintendo can make a lot of money in the next 3 years but they wont risk any of those profits on one more race.

Poita

No, you're not the only one. And I also love the DS (and have been a fan of Nintendo for years). I own a Wii and have NEVER felt more ripped-off than I have paying $250 for this very, VERY last-gen console. Nintendo charging anything over $99 for this GameCube with a new controller is a crime. Period.

Sloopydrew

Er ... wait. This is 2007? Color me 20th Century.

Sloopydrew

Also the wii version should be twice as big x.X It is in widescreen whereas the cube version was in letterboxed.

Zim

aelfin

jsin007

I would not be surprised if the Wii was Nintendos last console and that they stuck to hand helds and console software.

That statement would have made more sense before the Wii came out. It would seem strange to me if Nintendo quit the console market after just having created what is (so far) one of the best-selling consoles of all time.

It also seems to be premature to make this prediction with no real idea what Microsoft or Sony's next moves will be. Microsoft and Sony have both made some monumentally stupid moves in the past, some of which I'd consider excellent evidence that it's not always possible to buy innovation.

Next time around they will look for an innovation boost and all things beeing equal as far as innovation goes, the console with the most power (if offered at a reasonable price) will be the console that everyone goes for.

The consoles that will be most successful, all else equal, will be the consoles with the best games. Processing power is just one factor that gives developers the ability to build better games. Also, Sony and Microsoft have not sold at the most reasonable price in the past, and that's already selling at a loss. What makes you think they'll have more reasonable pricing in the future?

Regarding the OP: I never got a chance to play that the first time around, so I'd certainly buy it. A good game reprinted with a cooler control scheme? Sounds good to me.

L33tminion

i appreciate your opinion dude but i think you have to get a more clear picture of the 'size' of the various companies.
there's a general feeling that if a company has producs that are universally visible then they are all pretty much scrillionairs. Actually it's not so. For example if you compare 'Sony' to 'Panasonic' you wil find that Panasonic is owned by Matsushita and Matstushita is like an elephant compared to a gnat when you compare them to Sony. Sony has been fast and innovative and has grown large since the walkman and even larger since the PS1 & 2 but . . . . compared to Sony, Nintendo and Sega were always tiny just as compared to Nintendo, Atari was tiny.
Now, Sony is dwarfed by Microsoft but they are both big boys compared to Nintendo.
There have been three major escalations in the games industry as far as companies turning their attention to it. As the games industry grew to eclipse the movie or music biz as far as dollars spent goes the bigger fish went after it.
First it was upstarts like Atari, Sega and Nintendo. They had a field day until the mid 90S when a relative giant like Sony waded in with the all conquering (and so far in my opinion the only truely stellar console for its day) PS1. Ever since that day Nintendso and its contemporaries have been playing a survival game.
After Microsofts attention was gotten by the money machine that was the PS1 even Sony have been sweating. Microsoft have basically spent their way into the games biz.
Compared to Sony and especially Microsoft, Nintendo is, financially, weak. You might say 'who cares' but money is a weapon in business. People will only stick with Nintendo as long as companies like Microsof lazily rely on vulgar brute force in games. My whole point here is that Nintendo were too money grubbing to put their cash reserves on the block in order to take a risk (which is what every new console gen is). Nintendo developed a sense of entiltlement in the games biz and the Sony/Microsoft intrusion has scared them. They have had to resort to extreme innovation in order to survive and so far they are doing very well. But . . . . if Sony and Microsoft 'add' extreme innovation 'to' their powerful machines then where can Nintendo go?????
People are buying the Wii because the controller ads another dimention to game play. If the other big boys also have that then people will ignore such a machine as the Wii. In other words, Nintendo only survives in the console biz due to Sony and MS allowing them to keep the edge when it comes to innovation. The sucess of the Wii has been a shock to everyone, even Nintendo who under produced their console.
The best thing about the Wii is the huge impact it will have on the 'next' generation. What can Nintendo do to have an edge then? There are only so many tricks you can pull before you 'also' have to rely on power.
When two opponents meet then the weaker one can still be victorious if they suppliment their lack of power with great technique (or strategy). But if both have the same level of technique then the one with more power will be victorious.
At the moment Nintendo has survived and even excelled by virtue of teqnique. Sony and Microsoft have been typical brutes and relied on power mainly. Next time around they will look for an innovation boost and all things beeing equal as far as innovation goes, the console with the most power (if offered at a reasonable price) will be the console that everyone goes for.

I would not be surprised if the Wii was Nintendos last console and that they stuck to hand helds and console software.

Poita

take a chill pill. if it really bothers you that much then stop reading and go somewhere else.

doesn't matter who is to blame, its becoming more and more obvious how much weaker the Wii is than the competition. No matter how you spell it out, the novelty of a motion sensing controller doesn't warrant the re-release of basically the same game.

dirkxxdiggler

Loaded FOR bear, loaded FOR bear...

I hate when people say "Loaded TO bear," and I go and say it.

Grrr...

PapaBear434

To be fair, however, they don't have as much money to toss into the pot as Sony or Microsoft. Nintendo is a game company, and ONLY a game company.

Microsoft practically owns 95% of the worlds computer operating system market. That's a lot of money coming in from HP, Dell, and the hundreds of other computer makers out there, as well as individual sales from people who buy a copy for a self built rig. They also have a software suite that is used by almost every office in the world to do anything from word processing to slide shows to cross continental business presentations. They are loaded to bear.

Sony is a multimedia conglomerate powerhouse that have their hand in everything from movies to music to software to most definitely hardware. Almost every home in the world has at least one Sony made product somewhere, whether it be your TV itself or just the LCD screen running inside of it. If not that, they have receivers, speakers, computers (ironically running Windows,) stereo's, personal music players, branded head phones, sound cards, media centers...

Nintendo is making a nice little profit on the DS and the Wii, this is true. But they couldn't afford to go "all in" with MS and Sony and supply the Wii with graphical power AND innovation. The risk of failure would have been a kick in the throat: Not necessarily fatal, but it would have been a severe injury to the company.

I'm sure they would have attempted to "keep up with the Jones's" if the risk/cost of getting the initial install base wasn't so high. They can't afford to loose money (billions even) for the first two years waiting to let the game licenses to start digging you out of the hole.

PapaBear434

Last I checked Nintendo didnt have a bank that would allow them to travel forward in time, and borrow on money they didnt have yet back in 2001-2002 when development for the Wii started.

See development cycles for technologically advanced computer systems, even largely off the shelf type systems, takes 5 maybe 6 years. Nintendo made a decision to bow out technologically because of costs in 2001-2002, and decided to think outside the box as far as user interface was concerned. A gamble that clearly paid off.

And to the comment ideas are cheap, implementation is hard? That is the stupidest thing i have ever heard.

First you plagerized it from peter T davis, in regards to search engine optimization.

Link here:

http://petertdavis.net/2007/03/14/ideas-are-cheap-implimen...

Secondly, its so nonsensical. Ideas, innovations, creativity, is at such a dearth cause it is so rare, and expensive to come up with something truely new. Let alone risky, and litigiously dangerous.

Asharak

Nintendo has ALWAYS had "plenty of money" to do things, but they have also always erred on the side of safety. That is to say, Nintendo has NEVER actually taken a financial risk, all of their hardware earns them money from the beginning. The Wii (the box) is the result of that. Nintendo simply didn't want to risk spending money to make a console that could compete (they could've and still break-even by their first 6 months, but they didn't).

Indy_aka_Rex

I'm too tired to respond the other stuff at the moment (maybe tomorrow) but had to say something about this just to clear it up.

While the Gamecube was doing fairly poorly compared to the other consoles and the DS was just starting to gain popularity they had the money to launch and completely fail another 13 consoles. Considering the fact the DS has been printing money for about the last 1-1 1/2 years, they had plenty of money to do whatever they pleased.

It's easy to say one person could have done this or whatever but it's much harder to do it. Ideas are cheap, implementation is hard.

twesterm

I mean the Wii version is 2 years later... my apologies for the typo.

Asharak

Just an FYI, RE4 on GC was released on January 2005 and the PS2 ver.. came out in October of that year, so it wasn't 2 years later, it was 10 months later.

Indy_aka_Rex

but in particular . . .

@totalwar
you are a tard. There was nothing incoherent about my comment. You not understanding something doesnt classify it as bein incoherent. Dope.

You console kiddes are so pwned by the corporations. They have whipped you into corporate loyalty drones. So much so that any objective comments that don't gush about your chosen platform is seen as an attack in your feeble, compromised minds. You miss a lot of intelligent debate because you reduce every comment to 'so and so sucks or rules'.

I was making the point that Nintendo's value here is their unique approach to gaming and not the box that sits next to your tv. I was making the point that it's irrelevant what technology is in the box or how high tech it is and that Nintendo are kicking ass because of their approach and that is something that could be used 'together' with great graphics. This idea that you have to have a unique approach to controler or game design 'OR' good graphics is rediculous. Microsoft and Sony could have made the nice machines they have 'AND' shown some inventiveness when it comes to game deign and controller design. Instead they just rely on brute force and hackneyed gameplay style.
And you Wii tards who truly, really, honestly believe that Nintendo when with a different skew towards the game scene out of bravery are about as dense as it gets.
Nintendo could not compete financially with the big boy, or more acurately were unwilling to risk so much money in the next gen war. It was fear and a reluctance to invest money that pushed them towards being inventive in their approach. I don't critisise them for that. In fact it's a breath of fresh air but let's not kid ourselves about the reasones they took that path. Nintendo has always been an exceedinly greedy company and devs have alwlays hated them due to their controlling and arrogant deals (something Sony is now achieving in the dev community).
Necesity is the mother of invention and in the absence of Nintendo having any balls when it comes to standing up to Microsoft and Sony as far as financial outlay goes they had to be inventive to make a relevant contribution to the games scene. Lucky for they they have great tallent when it comes to the approach to games design so it worked out well for them.
But drop the Nintendo and Wii suck up fest eh, get real Wii tards.

By the way, i'm not a 360 or PS3 player. I think consoles are for kids and i play on a PC but i do find the whole games industry interesting. I'm just sick of this idea that the Wii as a 'machine' is anythng special. It isn't. It's barely more than a game cube. It's Nintendoes approach to design and overcomming their lack of graphics prowess thats special, even if they did have to resort to that strategy due to their unwillingness to provide nice graphics, which let's be honest is a big part of gaming.
So, hats off to Nintendo for their innovative approach but er, hats back on to wii tards who think that the actual box of the wii is somehow unique and special.

Poita

1. the ps2 version added some content, and it was on the ps2 which meant more then 17 people would be able to play it, AND it wasnt released 2 years after the GC version. It was pretty much a timed exclusive to the GC. And I dont consider a second DVD of behind the scenes crap and all this shit, small amount of content:

(thanks wikipedia):

*Separate Ways, a five chapter mini-game which revolves around Ada Wong's involvement the player ...can use a pump-action shotgun and a bowgun with explosive arrows, two exclusive weapons.

*Ada's Report, a five-part documentary, which analyzes Ada's relationship with Albert Wesker and his role in the plot.

*New costume set

*P.R.L. 412 (Plaga Removal Laser)

*Movie Browser, a feature that allows the player to view cut scenes from the both Separate Ways and the actual game.

*"Amateur" mode, an easier difficulty setting

*Support for widescreen televisions.

2. Far worse? most reviewers said it wasnt nearly that bad, and that graphics didnt take the hit they expected.

3. 30 bucks for a 2 year old port of a game with a new control scheme? thats not too good.

*as an aside, the Wii version has NO new content apart from what was in the PS2 version, cept new controls.

Asharak

Indy_aka_Rex

See this would be a nice excuse if the Wii wasn't advertised/promoted by Nintendo itself as being more interactive/immersive than the competition. They give you a game where you EMULATE real-actions in the box.

You KNOW you're not supposed to run or kick in a regular console game because from the beginning they were emphasized as allowing you to do what you couldn't without having to put yourself in harms way or... you know... do all that hard work.

The Wii has been evangelized by Nintendo itself as "the next step" because of its controller and how you can perform actions that emulate real-ones. What would the point of the wiimote be if you couldn't swing that "racket" or throw that "bowling ball"? No, no... it's all just "waggle", wait... there goes Nintendo's ENTIRE advertising budget down the drain. Those commercials with the asian dudes? Totally bunk.

My logic is sound, yours isn't.

Indy_aka_Rex

Its only saving grace: lots of people never owned a cube, and get the chance to play an old, yet still great game."

So by your logic the PS2 version was an even worse port?

1. Small amount content added. If you think it was a large amount, well, then the Wii would have a large amount of added content since the GC version didn't have it.

2. The PS2 version had far worse graphics than the GC version so be happy this one has the GC graphics. Since this is just a port, why do you even care about the graphics? They are already amazing. Also, this does add widescreen support which is nice.

3. Be happy it's $30, they could have charged $40. Personally, I think $30 is a beyond hair price for this. A lot of people have never played this game because they never owned a GC. This is giving people a chance to play what is probably one of the best games of last gen.

So no, that doesn't spell it out. So once again, why is this a bad port? You get a great game for a cheap price, it opens that great game up to people that have never seen it before, it has the best parts of the PS2 and GC, and it has a new control scheme. So why is this a bad port?

twesterm

btw, your logic makes no sense. if Nintendo came out with turntables, i'd play the RE4 port and rub a clit to dodge a boulder.

masticate

No offense, have you not played Vegas, Lost Planet, Crackdown, Splinter Cell: DA, or heck even Condemned? Or seen any game footage for pretty much anything coming out, uhm, for the next year or two?

Are you saying Wolfenstien on the xbox, or Halo 2 for that matter, hold a candle graphically to Prey?

Or do you possibly have large cataracts limiting your visual perception?

Asharak

Indy_aka_Rex

People using games like this, Twilight Princess, and Prince of Persia to insult the wii's graphical capabilities are only proving themselves ignorant. These games look like gamecube games because they ARE gamecube games ported to the wii without graphical upgrades. If you want to analyze the wii's graphical capabilities then actually use a game made for the wii as an example. Basing your argument off of games like this makes about as much sense as using Virtual Console ports as the standard of wii graphics.

Rene

So far the most impressive thing about 360 graphics I've seen is the text...because it's always nicely anti-aliased. I'm not saying there aren't good games, and nice looking ones at that...but barely anything that couldn't have been done on the original Xbox, but with worse looking text.

dowingba

1. Small/nonexistent amount of new content
2. No significatn graphical updates
3. $10 price hike over a existing version for just new controls.

That pretty much spell it out?

Its only saving grace: lots of people never owned a cube, and get the chance to play an old, yet still great game.

Asharak

Indy_aka_Rex

so...why do you think this is a bad port? And please don't answer with "it's just a badly done port" again, the people want reasons!

twesterm

Indy_aka_Rex

See, the thing is though they didn't.

Nintendo is the one that took a step back from the graphics are everything idea that was hurting the industry and chose to make a machine where developers could focus solely on innovative gameplay. They then released a line of games that took advantage of that concept.

You're right that Sony or Microsoft could have released a controller that does everything the remote does but they didn't. They also continued with the Moore's Law idea and did the same old thing and look at where it's getting them and look at what's beating them.

I suppose the easiest way to end this little mini rant is with a nice little appropriate quote from an appropriate person.

"The graveyard of any industry is filled with the headstones of companies who decided to keep doing things the same old way."
-Reggie Fils-Aime

twesterm

BPMν

Sailorcancer

Laser_iCE

Darlan

Why don't you worthless little nothings do something like try making your own hit title game, spend hundreds and thousands of hours developing and producing it and then tell me you feel like rerendering the whole fuckin thing to shut whiny little bitches like yourselves up about graphics. Or add another shitty level to shut up the content police.

Sometimes I wonder why I even come to this site sometimes, but then I realize that most of the time I laugh about how retarded you sad piles of shit really are, but then sometimes, I get irate seeing as how stupidity doesn't seem to wither here, but feed and grow instead.

Congrats Kotakians on a your well wasted lives!

DomDeluigi

Zelda has been the same game since OOT with fresh paint slathered on. Hell it was the same game since LTP but with an extra dimension really.

For all the "amazing" game design of nintendo they churn content like butter. mario party 128 is coming out soon, and its actually the 128th edition of the game!

This RE4 port is more or less a GC clone, which is sad, b/c a lot of people are expecting better of a company like capcom. This is shovel wear, but its still a fantastic, and impressive game that if you didnt own a GC, or spring for the ps2 edition (yea i am talking to all 6 people who didnt)it is well worth 30 bones.

I hate when i have to admit shovel wear is good.

As an aside you can buy the ps2 version for $19.99, 10 bucks less, no gimmeck controls.

Asharak

metaly

Look at the video, you aim with the analog nub when sniping.

Indy_aka_Rex

Darlan

a) owns a Wii
b) does NOT own a 360/PS3

Granted, the advance is mostly technical and for the average person not using an HDTV, it's possible that some last gen games look good even when compared to ps3/360 games.

What makes you all think that is because the last Generation wasn't half that bad, but the gap is undeniable and it's a pretty huge one. Some games have the possibility to demonstrate it better, like Dead Rising with its stores filled with high res content (a bookstore will have a high res picture for every book's cover in it) and hundreds of mostly different zombies walking around.

interstate78

y2julio

y2julio

Tisteldun

Anyway, using (relatively) low-quality, blocky Flash video to compare the two is just silly. I'd rather have high-quality jpegs side-by-side. Besides, we have no idea how the video was collected (s-video on the cube? component on the wii? same brightness and color saturation? same intermediary encoding?).

Doesn't matter. RE4 was one of the best looking games of the last generation. I'd rather play a goregeous old game than a half-assed new one.

superberg

And what games are "Dead Rising" exactly like? What games have you played "over and over" again that are just like Dead Rising? Dead Rising was an incredible game and an incredibly unique game. Don't insult a title just to prop up a different console. Because, if you want to talk about games you've played over and over again, give Zelda a try. They don't even bother writing a new story. They just recycle the same plot time and time again.

Sloopydrew

More like, one Gamecube, duct taped to itself and kicked in the junk.

theALLseeingEYE

Not "true widescreen" support if, by "true widescreen" it will fit the entire screen without being stretched. It has a 5% underscan, as do all Wii games outside of Zelda and Wii Sports. So no, not "true" widescreen and I wish one of these companies would get sued for making that claim.

Sloopydrew

Cmon guys this is only 30 bones,clams, and also like someone said before decapitation is included for the USA! :)

Still think this is the best Resident Evil thus far, and will play it again and again

Teekan

And yes, no improvements from the Cube version. Especially not all that extra content from the PS2 version that wasn't on the Cube.

Yes, Nintendo is milking your wallets. Via Capcom.

You've figured out the grand conspiracy at work here.

Dragoonkin

Who said you didn't aim with th Wiimote? Thats pretty much the entire point of this port, Wiimote aim, am I not correct? Oh, and Wiimote shanking.

theALLseeingEYE

Grim Santo

Seriously, get the fucking facts straight. It's not just you, but I'm sick of everyone blaming Nintendo for everything that's on their system. Capcom ported the game, Nintendo only licenses it.

elim

AqueousBeef

Right now this seems to be not one of those "The Wii can't handle better graphics than this!" moments are more like the Ubisoft "Take a popular GC game, slap on new controls and resell it" moments.

People keep on thinking that the game's supposed to be like the jump from Ninja Gaiden Black to Ninja Gaiden Sigma when really it's just a cash in....

Moose

Indy_aka_Rex

gunbu

TOCATL

dadeisvenm

dirkxxdiggler

huginn

"But, it looks the same, thats not next generation."

Who cares if they looks the same. Clearly the RE4 NGC is going to be a directors cut in the Wii. Updated graphics, new controls, ect. But given how the NGC one already looked amazing, do you really care?

The last generation to this one has been the smallest technological jump in hardware ever. Seen God of War lately? THAT looks like a PS3 game.

The point? Who cares, They both look amazing.

huginn

dadeisvenm

causality

I don't think the past few months are any indication of the system's future in terms of game quality. I'd be willing to bet few if any third party developers put their nuts in Wii's basket before it became huge.

But no one's going to listen to me anyway, so by all means, continue the hysterics.

Elly

Hm.

Insomnia Bob

2. You cant really compare graphics of these two. Give me two TVs a gamecube and a Wii and I will tell you the difference.

Tisteldun

Spartan1308™

whitehawk

moominsean

I blame the developers for being unimaginative hacks, not Nintendo.

Falconfire

I missed out on RE4 when I had a cube, so Im looking forward to picking it up for me Wii.

ViperVin

NitrousO

As for RE4, I never got around to buying the PS2 version, so I might end up buying this. If you play the Gamecube version on a standard TV it's not an issue but since it doesn't support anamorphic widescreen on an HDTV you have to play it in a tiny, tiny little box. Unless the controls are absolutely broken it might be worth it to be able to see what's going on.

Nobuyuki

While graphics are not the Wii's strongpoint (compared to 360 and PS3, anyways), it seems many developers still aren't utilizing it to at least GameCube-level of visuals.

BPMν

Wii fans, find some rope and let's start a lynching

totalwar23

BPMν

Swift_

RonJeremy4Pres

Huh???'

Exactly what I was thinking. Twilight Princess might look like a Gamecube title that was vomited on and left dying in the gutter, but if I really dig into that big library of Wii games I find a whole bunch of rushed ports and low-budget titles that look like PS1 games my dog shat out after eating too much corn.

But hey, Nintendo has a nifty controller. Given that games on all three of the new consoles are just sequels, clones, or knockoffs, and most people don't have HDTVs, a pointy controller is still a better gimmick. Hell, that's why I have a Wii and no plans to buy a PS3 or 360.

supabeast

Sssshhhh... You'll only anger the mob...

Wait, there coming! Every man for themselves! You're on your own, partner!

PapaBear434

As for "Poita", you don't even get it man, give it up. Heh. Stick to your 360/PS3 and don't bother the Wii fans with your opinions.

Custom Reality

I win!.... yeah...

thomasav

noid

Poita

itcomesinwaves

reesimo

Tom90deg

whitehawk

I for one am going to buy the game again, just because I can imagine aiming will be a lot easier.

Gonna rack me up some insane scores in the merc mode. XD

Witzbold

Lanky Bugger

Capcom REALLY wants people to buy this game again.

Marasai

Didn't Capcom say they didn't touch the graphics?

MaxVest