Anyways, this is more of a pyrrhic victory imho, since they are no doubt removing valueable content from the game to release it on the markets, which is a horrible message to send to ALL game developers; a restriction on "free" game development will always be nagging at the corner.
I don't see what all the fuss about this game is, the first game was decisively poor. I'm probably only interested to see how it performs with Wii controls before the big 3 (or 4 now Kart has been announced) launch.
The graphical jump from 6th to 7th generation consoles was basically... unnoticable? Seriously, I can't tell the difference on 90% of the games. Its the smallest jump in any of the generation gaps, so its not that big a deal.
The problem is; while sure, the Wii is weaker graphically then the other 2, the other 2 barely improved over the 6th generation at all. Halo 3 looks just like halo 2. Resident Evil 4 looks better then almost all PS3 games. Look at the jump between 4 and 5, from SNES to N64.
Phizzy, the Wii isn't for you. It isn't shit, it's a great console only for the right people. And those people appear to be a vast majority of the public as James has clearly shown as it is dominating in sales. In my opinion the 360 is the better console in power and graphics, but the Wii is an innovative console which has a clear future ahead of itself.
You're just trying to provoke a pointless argument by saying the Wii is shit and hoping it fails without backing up a reason apart from you not liking it. I respect your opinion that the Wii isn't for you, but you haven't actually said that. You've just claimed it as a fact that it's a shitty system when there are a lot of people who would disagree with you.
Although I am annoyed many of the games that come out for it are graphically unimpressive, after reading someone's analysis on how the Wii is capable of great graphics (and seeing screenshots of upcoming games.. Super Mario Galaxy, anyone?) I still have hope that it will prove that the Wii can also boast stunning graphics as well as innovative gameplay.
PS3 doesn't merit its price tag, in terms of improvement over PS2.
XBOX360 *does* merit its price tag, but I'm not feeling lucky enough to risk a brick.
Wii isn't exactly going to set me back a paycheck.
Now, I might get a 360 once halo 3 is out and the price goes down, but its doubtful. PS3 is like a sinking ship.
Hey, IMHO, Manhunt 1 was a great game from beginning to almost the end. I loved the storyline, that feel where you had to run and hide. Of course, I don't think it's for everyone. Some people love a game with generic weapons, where you run into a room and blast everyone ala Doom, Half-Life, Battlefield, Counter-Strike, etc, etc. I'm quite suprised how many people thought it was just overhyped trash. Even technically, the way the game awards points/unlocks, requires skills, brings the player close to death but doesn't annoy you by forcing you to restart all the time.. it's excellent. And the fact that it had very low requirements for something so engaging, that was great.
But one thing I do hate is how much hype there is about the gore in Manhunt. I'm getting sick of all the violence in games, it's as if the publishers thought that more blood = more $$$. It doesn't add to the fun and all the blood actually makes the graphics worse. Why don't they make a game where you 'make love' instead of kill people instead then try to get it rated M? Reproduction is much nicer than killing and following the same arguments that the games industry have been giving.. the kids will know the difference between fantasy and reality. It's free speech after all.
I guess that's why the Wii is selling so well. The American game industry is focused on selling the most realistic, most beautiful, most controversial games. While the Japanese tend to go for cute, simple, crazy fun. The Wii has more power than the average PC these days, but you really don't need that much power to make a good game.
There's a HUGE difference in the PS3 and PS2 graphical capabilities. I'm surprised anyone would find them 'barely noticable'. Maybe the games were just not made to take advantage of it's full power. But one other thing I hate about the new games industry is all the focus on lighting on textures. It's like a acne-faced girl using the wrong foundation - it highlights all the pimples. The advanced power of pixel shaders have given games the 'tacky n00b Photoshop' look from back in 1999. It's not that they don't have the power to make good graphics, it's that they're focusing too much on textures and polygon count and not on the beautiful things like animation. I love the graphics on Final Fantasy 8. Even though most of it was nothing compared to today's look, the animations were what made it fun. I also loved the look on Prince of Persia: Sands of Time instead of the detailed one on PoP: T2T.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.