The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Anyone noticed the slew of utterly crap games this year? Included among these lengendary gems *ahem* are Monster Trux Extreme, the brillaintly named Game Party and of course everyones favourite pile of hot trash: Ninjabread Man!
The point I'm trying to make is that developers are all jumping onto the wii bandwagon and piling on the shovelware in the hope they'll actually make some money off them. Unfortunately this does actually sometimes happen (Carnival Games floats to the forefront of ones mind). You would generally think this was harmless and we'd just be staring at shelves of mediocrity, but I feel the problem is more serious than that. When developers can't be bothered to market or give their worthy titles real names, or God forbid release their games at a time which is not at the same time as Smash Brothers. (Suda, you suck) They run the risk of losing out in sales and this is hardly encouraging for 3rd parties willing to create decent games.
Zack and Wiki is a prime example of this. I personally do not blame people who bought that gingerbread game instead of this.
Solution? Anyone remember the days of the "Nintendo Seal of Quality"? Sure, it was comparable to Nazi Germany but a return of this could ensure that some real third party games are made. Even the five game limit per year would not be a bad thing. Just look at Capcom, they released four games last year and all of them were GOOD. Now look at Ubisoft, since the release of wii they have released about ten games and all of them have been average at best (with the exception of maybe Rayman)
I'm sure Nintendo doesn't want to return to the days of horrible Nintendo-Everyone relations but there has to be a healty balance or else this problem is just going to continue.
I want to take this issue to Nintendo directly, another ahem. So I am going to write to the "ask Nintendo" section of ONM magazine as I would like to find out why they don't simply do it. Games like My Word Coach and Catz are going to destroy the systems credibility.
I'd like to hear your thoughts =D
The point I'm trying to make is that developers are all jumping onto the wii bandwagon and piling on the shovelware in the hope they'll actually make some money off them. Unfortunately this does actually sometimes happen (Carnival Games floats to the forefront of ones mind). You would generally think this was harmless and we'd just be staring at shelves of mediocrity, but I feel the problem is more serious than that. When developers can't be bothered to market or give their worthy titles real names, or God forbid release their games at a time which is not at the same time as Smash Brothers. (Suda, you suck) They run the risk of losing out in sales and this is hardly encouraging for 3rd parties willing to create decent games.
Zack and Wiki is a prime example of this. I personally do not blame people who bought that gingerbread game instead of this.
Solution? Anyone remember the days of the "Nintendo Seal of Quality"? Sure, it was comparable to Nazi Germany but a return of this could ensure that some real third party games are made. Even the five game limit per year would not be a bad thing. Just look at Capcom, they released four games last year and all of them were GOOD. Now look at Ubisoft, since the release of wii they have released about ten games and all of them have been average at best (with the exception of maybe Rayman)
I'm sure Nintendo doesn't want to return to the days of horrible Nintendo-Everyone relations but there has to be a healty balance or else this problem is just going to continue.
I want to take this issue to Nintendo directly, another ahem. So I am going to write to the "ask Nintendo" section of ONM magazine as I would like to find out why they don't simply do it. Games like My Word Coach and Catz are going to destroy the systems credibility.
I'd like to hear your thoughts =D
The Nintendo seal of "quality" was all about seeing off pirate copies and reverse engineered cartridges.
God forbid that ever happen to gems like Anubis.
Edgy wrote:
> The Nintendo Seal Of Quality has always been about cvonfirming
> the game has been legitimately licenced and that it is 100%
> compatible with the system it is intended to be played with.
>
> It has never been to tell you if the game is any good or not.
indeed true. some truly horrifying games have sported the seal of quality ever since the NES.
it`s easy to prove this - THQ.
THQ made snes games.
BAAAAAAAAD snes games (home alone 1&2, wayes world 1&2) yet each of their boxes bore that gold emblem.
the idea i think is simply to get as many games out there as possible, someone will buy them. besides, as i think someone here already said, it`s all so individual that if it WERE a quality test, some truly unique games may never have gotten through on the basis that the testers didn`t like/get them.
> The Nintendo Seal Of Quality has always been about cvonfirming
> the game has been legitimately licenced and that it is 100%
> compatible with the system it is intended to be played with.
>
> It has never been to tell you if the game is any good or not.
indeed true. some truly horrifying games have sported the seal of quality ever since the NES.
it`s easy to prove this - THQ.
THQ made snes games.
BAAAAAAAAD snes games (home alone 1&2, wayes world 1&2) yet each of their boxes bore that gold emblem.
the idea i think is simply to get as many games out there as possible, someone will buy them. besides, as i think someone here already said, it`s all so individual that if it WERE a quality test, some truly unique games may never have gotten through on the basis that the testers didn`t like/get them.
Hence the lawsuit.
Game Genie never had one...
pb wrote:
> Anyway, I seem to remember every game had a Seal of Quality
> (jokes about Seals aplenty in 80's Ninty mag)
Well, to be on the market in the first place, it would have to have had one.
> Anyway, I seem to remember every game had a Seal of Quality
> (jokes about Seals aplenty in 80's Ninty mag)
Well, to be on the market in the first place, it would have to have had one.
That's the meaning of the current seal, the old one filtered crap and made sure the game was at least programmed properly unlike some of these broken games.
The Nintendo Seal Of Quality has always been about cvonfirming the game has been legitimately licenced and that it is 100% compatible with the system it is intended to be played with.
It has never been to tell you if the game is any good or not.
It has never been to tell you if the game is any good or not.
One person's crap is another's treasure though, so it's really hard to put a seal of quality on something as a way of saying it's good.
I was playing Tank Battle on the DS yesterday and was quite enjoying it, despite it being one of those games that might be labelled as a cheap budget piece of crap, I found it quite playable.
Anyway, I seem to remember every game had a Seal of Quality (jokes about Seals aplenty in 80's Ninty mags) and still the crap kept coming, so it's no guarantee...
I was playing Tank Battle on the DS yesterday and was quite enjoying it, despite it being one of those games that might be labelled as a cheap budget piece of crap, I found it quite playable.
Anyway, I seem to remember every game had a Seal of Quality (jokes about Seals aplenty in 80's Ninty mags) and still the crap kept coming, so it's no guarantee...
Anyone noticed the slew of utterly crap games this year? Included among these lengendary gems *ahem* are Monster Trux Extreme, the brillaintly named Game Party and of course everyones favourite pile of hot trash: Ninjabread Man!
The point I'm trying to make is that developers are all jumping onto the wii bandwagon and piling on the shovelware in the hope they'll actually make some money off them. Unfortunately this does actually sometimes happen (Carnival Games floats to the forefront of ones mind). You would generally think this was harmless and we'd just be staring at shelves of mediocrity, but I feel the problem is more serious than that. When developers can't be bothered to market or give their worthy titles real names, or God forbid release their games at a time which is not at the same time as Smash Brothers. (Suda, you suck) They run the risk of losing out in sales and this is hardly encouraging for 3rd parties willing to create decent games.
Zack and Wiki is a prime example of this. I personally do not blame people who bought that gingerbread game instead of this.
Solution? Anyone remember the days of the "Nintendo Seal of Quality"? Sure, it was comparable to Nazi Germany but a return of this could ensure that some real third party games are made. Even the five game limit per year would not be a bad thing. Just look at Capcom, they released four games last year and all of them were GOOD. Now look at Ubisoft, since the release of wii they have released about ten games and all of them have been average at best (with the exception of maybe Rayman)
I'm sure Nintendo doesn't want to return to the days of horrible Nintendo-Everyone relations but there has to be a healty balance or else this problem is just going to continue.
I want to take this issue to Nintendo directly, another ahem. So I am going to write to the "ask Nintendo" section of ONM magazine as I would like to find out why they don't simply do it. Games like My Word Coach and Catz are going to destroy the systems credibility.
I'd like to hear your thoughts =D
The point I'm trying to make is that developers are all jumping onto the wii bandwagon and piling on the shovelware in the hope they'll actually make some money off them. Unfortunately this does actually sometimes happen (Carnival Games floats to the forefront of ones mind). You would generally think this was harmless and we'd just be staring at shelves of mediocrity, but I feel the problem is more serious than that. When developers can't be bothered to market or give their worthy titles real names, or God forbid release their games at a time which is not at the same time as Smash Brothers. (Suda, you suck) They run the risk of losing out in sales and this is hardly encouraging for 3rd parties willing to create decent games.
Zack and Wiki is a prime example of this. I personally do not blame people who bought that gingerbread game instead of this.
Solution? Anyone remember the days of the "Nintendo Seal of Quality"? Sure, it was comparable to Nazi Germany but a return of this could ensure that some real third party games are made. Even the five game limit per year would not be a bad thing. Just look at Capcom, they released four games last year and all of them were GOOD. Now look at Ubisoft, since the release of wii they have released about ten games and all of them have been average at best (with the exception of maybe Rayman)
I'm sure Nintendo doesn't want to return to the days of horrible Nintendo-Everyone relations but there has to be a healty balance or else this problem is just going to continue.
I want to take this issue to Nintendo directly, another ahem. So I am going to write to the "ask Nintendo" section of ONM magazine as I would like to find out why they don't simply do it. Games like My Word Coach and Catz are going to destroy the systems credibility.
I'd like to hear your thoughts =D