Wii's dirty secret: A dearth of good games

Silellak - 612 days 9 hours ago

You know, I've heard this little doozy before, but the fact of the matter is, the "Seal of Quality" was always a load of crap. All it meant back in the NES/SNES/N64 days is that they'd gone through the Nintendo licensing process.

I remember as a kid I had a Shinobi game for the NES that DIDN'T have the Seal of Quality, simply because Nintendo never approved it.

The definition back then was: "This official seal is your assurance that Nintendo has approved the quality of this product. Always look for this seal when buying games and accessories to ensure complete compatibility with your <insert name of Nintendo system here>."

Basically, it means the game or accessory would work with your system and not brick or otherwise damage it. Not that it was actually a good game.

Unless you think all NES/SNES/N64 games with the Seal of Quality were good games, in which case I would point at you and laugh mercilessly.

Case in point? Superman 64 has the "Official Nintendo Seal of Quality".

@Below:

I see what you're saying, and the seal WAS important because before that, you could write a game for a system with absolutely no say from the hardware maker. They were a lot like PCs in that regard, I suppose. Nintendo definately set the standard that we follow today, since developers have to get dev kits from the hardware maker and work with the hardware maker to get the games published for the console. And for that, we should be very grateful.

However, people seem to falsely assume the Seal of Quality actually meant it was a GOOD game, which is just not true. It's not like the Seal was somehow preventing really bad shovelware from making it onto previous Nintendo consoles. Again - see Superman 64 for a perfect example of a universally-depsised game that still has the "Seal of Quality".

Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report

Adamalicious - 612 days 8 hours ago

I must respectfully disagree. Atari came out, video games blew up, then came mass amounts of shovel-ware, the industry crashed. With the NES Nintendo single-handedly revived home video gaming and the Seal of Quality was a big part of that - I believe it set the precedent for how things are done now where console makers have a say in what comes out for their product. Certainly the Seal is more symbolic than the licensing structure, but the idea itself was and is really important.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

BrotherNick - 612 days 2 hours ago

Adamalicious, you really don't know what you're talking about...it was there for quality control only in coding, not that it kept out bad games...good coded games can have bad concepts. These games are just bad. :\
Here's my proof about the seal(read under history): http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report

Adamalicious - 611 days 16 hours ago

I don't want to start a flamewar or anything, but did you read that link you posted? It describes exactly what I was referring to and completely contradicts your "it was there for quality control only in coding" statement - "only" being the operative word here.

The Seal was meant to instill consumer confidence in games for the NES - confidence that had been eroded by the piles of crapware from the previous generation. It absolutely did not ONLY refer to coding as that was only a tiny part of it that consumer didn't understand or care about. What they did care about was spending money on a quality product for their kids.

From your link, QFT :

"One of the major reasons for the Video Game Crash of 1983 was customer dissatisfaction with a large portion of the introduced games.[citation needed] They were considered technically poor, tasteless or both; a particularly notorious example is Custer's Revenge. Many games were simply commercial tie-ins, such as the much maligned video game version of E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial.[citation needed] The Atari 2600, the biggest console on the market, had no lockout device, so anyone who could get programming tools could make and market a game for it. Games were rushed to market, resulting in poor titles and low consumer credibility.[citation needed]
Gamers understandably were wary of game makers when the Nintendo Entertainment System came out in 1985. The 10NES lockout chip solved the problem of controlling access to the console (for the most part), but there was the issue of customer confidence. So Nintendo introduced the Seal of Quality to show gamers that the games had met quality control standards in terms of basic programming and that the games would be suitable for the entire family and thus free of objectionable content. It was mainly a marketing ploy, but it worked – consumers were reassured, and the NES became a great success.[citation needed] Publishers were encouraged to create high-quality titles in other ways as well. Each publisher was only allowed five releases per year (with certain exceptions)[1], so effort was put into making those few titles successful."

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Room 641-A 8 5neDDaM - 612 days 8 hours ago

So by your logic, it was the PS1 & 2 that showed Nintendo "the light"?

So what is the current excuse for a dearth of good Wii games, now that we know that strategy isn't working one iota?

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

BeNice - 612 days 6 hours ago

go check the library for the ps2 and ps1 again , they showed nintendo that if they kept their quality control lax they could have more third party support and they do(however crappy it is0. IF you do believe that the ps2 and ps1 were full of stellar titles like final fantasy 7 and mgs i am sorry to burst your bubble. I owned a ps2 exclusively and there was a lot of trash out there.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

Voiceofreason - 612 days 6 hours ago

It is working very well. Maybe you didnt notice Wii leads in consoles sold every month and software sold every month..He is right. The PS1 and PS2 showed Nintendo that it isnt about quality but quantity. Games for everyone. I dont like every Wii game of course so thats why I dont buy every Wii game. Hannah Montana on Wii bothers me as much as SpongeBob on PS2 did. Not at all.If it didnt bother you on Ps2 it shouldnt bother you on Wii. Unless of course you are upset about getting to miss out on Hannah Montana.. Is that why you PS3 guys are so upset? You are seeing all the kiddie games you use to play on PS2 going to Wii?

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

Silellak - 612 days 9 hours ago

The sad thing is, there are plenty of great Wii games, but most people who own a Wii don't seem to be playing them.

Then again, I'm one of those freaks who actually LIKES Mario Kart Wii.

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

Voiceofreason - 612 days 6 hours ago

Software sales prove you both wrong.. Time to get current hate excuses..seriously if nobody plays the Wii at all what do they do with the PS3 when it has a lower attach rate then Wii? Obviously a lot of PS3's are collecting dust out there when Wii is kicking its ass in game sales yet nobody plays the Wii..

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

BrotherNick - 612 days 2 hours ago

It's not collecting dust, it's Folding@Home :D

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

d3l33t - 612 days 8 hours ago

on that note, they have the possibility to make good fun whole hearted games, but dont!

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Silellak - 612 days 8 hours ago

I would love to see a whole new generation of Nintendo IP's. I just don't think it'll ever happen, because it's too big of a risk.

It's quite sad. The Wii has proven that Nintendo's greatest strength AND it's greatest weakness are its large, constantly regurgetated franchises.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

BeNice - 612 days 6 hours ago

I will bet my life that microsoft and sony will rip this idea off for their consoles next gen even if they have uncsuccessfully attempted already. When it comes out next gen you will go wow its revolutionary way to control games. Next , the rehashes, dud are yout elling me that gta series which has 8 games so far is not a rehash? The gameplay does not change they didn't do a whole lot with the grpahics last gen after Gta 3. Its not a bad series and no one says it is. Big names are good for a reason they have nailed an idea well and they refuse to give it up. For instance I don't think Gta 4 deserves the 10/10 scores it got. I am playing this game right now. Its environments look like gta san andreas in hd sometimes. Richer colors and more polished that's gta 4, is it a bad game? NO. Is super mario galaxy bad, no its absolutely fvcking brilliant. I hope you get my point.

Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report

Voiceofreason - 612 days 6 hours ago

Lmao dude that was the best post ever. You talk about your Nintendo memories as a child only to later say they shouldnt make games that kids can play also..Then you talk about rehashes... Did you forget about GTA8 or FF17.. Maybe MG6? God of War 4? lot of rehashes coming on the PS3 as well. Yet they dont bother you...And the whole gimmick thing is just pathetic. Sixaxis was a gimmick and it failed. Wii isnt a gimmick and at this point you would have to be a fool to still be using that BS.Nintendo could do everything you claim and you would ignore them. Just like you did when you never bought a GC and it was the hardcore Nintendo system. Offered the highest average of M rated games of any Nintendo console. And look how the hardcore treated it. They went right for the shovel ware infested casual gaming PS1 and PS2.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

Silellak - 612 days 8 hours ago

That's actually a very good point that I never considered.

Especially considering a lot of the big-name Wii releases by Nintendo likely started their life as Gamecube titles, so they were easy to port.

+Bubbles for your great observation. I hope you're right.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

Voiceofreason - 612 days 6 hours ago

Very true. Been saying that for a long time now.. Nintendo is the only company that put time and effort into their games. Thats why their games are the best on Wii. Mushroom Men had an 18 month dev cycle so far and it looks to be a really good Wii game. Redsteel2 has been in the works since the first was released also. So that should be another quality Wii game.I'd really like to know how long Conduit was in development for. That is a big sign of quality. 1 year or less for casual games like GH3 but anything hardcore worth owning takes at least 2 years.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

hfaze - 611 days 15 hours ago

"As for Nintendo letting 3rd parties release shovelware/garbage on the Wii, I think the reason why Nintendo is allowing it is because it believes the free market will sort everything out."

Yep, that strategy worked GREAT for the Atari 2600 </sarcasm>

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

KeiZka - 612 days 1 hour ago

Oh, I don't know... Last I checked, PS3 wasn't that much far ahead in "good games" compared to Wii..? Then again, this is purely opinionated, whereas one could say they hate mario games because they are "sequels and overmilked", yet still like their GTA4, CoD4 etc etc...

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

KeiZka - 611 days 18 hours ago

Mind you, people, I was tempted to go and buy GTA4 but couldn't be arsed right now, since my monetary situation is what it is for now..

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

TheDeadMetalhead - 611 days 8 hours ago

You're right. The PS3 is worse than the Wii right now. I didn't say I would trade in my Wii. They do have some awesome games. And yeah, all the games are getting milked, now. Tekken 6, Soul Calibur 4, 80 million Ratchet and Clanks, Mortal Kombat 8? Seriously! It's the 3rd party developers that are messing up the Wii.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Pacifist - 611 days 12 hours ago

Nintendo is the only one making the good games on the wii. Even though mario,zelda, metroid, smash are just ports their still great for those who haven't played them before.

What your probably mean is "maybe if 3RD PARTY DEVS started making good games for their console i'd buy them and start playing it more."

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

sidar - 612 days 20 hours ago

...no its actually called CURRENT gen.....
Its funny how people say the Wii is last gen and such but at the same time they live in the past by saying
" Ps3 and 360 are next gen"

take note: they are called Current gen.

Agree(6) | Disagree(0) | Report

Pain - 611 days 10 hours ago

Not Next, but not old , It is 2 GameCubes ducked taped together, (lol i lov that saying cuz its true)

Then again Xbox 2 is kinda the same...Hi-Rez Xbox 1

Only Console that can Really be called NEXT-Gen is Playstation 3
-Cell
-RSX
-Blu-ray
-Even programing it u need to learn a NEW thing ><;;

mmm PS3....

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

TheDeadMetalhead - 611 days 8 hours ago

The PS3 has the best graphics, but where are all the games, Canada <sarcasm>? The PS3 is the most expensive and has the weakest game library, so ha ha ha. HA!!

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

sidar - 611 days 18 hours ago

" I thought i read it long ago that the Gamecube Graphics are superior than the Wii, so that makes the Wii less than "Current Gen".
"

SO because you read it somewhere it must be true?
Wii's specs are higher then those of the GCN, that already debunks the false statement.

Do you even think or what?

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report