So recently I've spent a lot of time browsing the internet looking at various blogs and gaming news sites and whatnot, and almost everywhere I go one thing seems to be universal. Nearly everyone
is on the Wii (or for that matter Nintendo) bashing bandwagon. "Blah blah Brawl sucked for these reasons, blah blah Nintendo is so stubborn and stupid," etc etc. And in many of these cases the original point or problem brought up is a legitimate one. However the majority of these people have no vested interest in the things the problem deal with in the first place
The brings up the first question: If you don't like a particular genre of movies (lets say horror) but a new movie of that genre has recently been released and is very popular and many people like it (and lets say it's a new Zombie flick), do you go watch it knowing you won't like it and bitch about it saying it's crap afterwards?
Which adds to my question: Why do people value the opinion of those who have no interest in the item in the first place? This isn't just a Nintendo thing. Look at Halo, I for one am not an FPS guy. I played Halo and thought it was ok, but I'd never go out and purchase a copy. Does that mean it's truly a lesser game simply because I, who had no interest in it in the first place, didn't like the game?
The other thing I've noticed is that people make huge deals out of particular aspects of certain games or systems. People complain about the Wii having space issues and note the lack of a storage hard drive. I seem to recall having an SD card slot on my system, where I can take and carry my 2 gigs worth of data with me wherever I go without having to lug the system. This is game developers'
faults for not trying to use what's given to them, the current SD slot. I see people constantly complaining about Nintendo's online functionality. This is another thing I'm tired of hearing about.
First off, Nintendo's online is one of the few online services (though I'm hesitant to call Nintendo's online a "service") where you don't have pay anything
to access it. Secondly, most of the games that have online functionality (however gimped) don't deserve to be played online
. Playing Guitar Hero online with someone vs having that person in the same room, it's a totally different experience. Playing a LAN game of your favorite FPS will always be richer than against others online across the country(or world). Brawl, no, Smash Brother's was always meant to be a multiplayer party game. The Wii as a system was meant to get people physically together enjoying video games with each other. To all who complain vehemently about Brawl's online functionality I say to you: go outside and get some real friends. Play the game with them and see if you're still upset later.
This brings about the second question: Is a game or system bad because their newest features aren't polished completely? Would the game be rated higher overall if this new feature wasn't even implemented?
Now I understand if a core mechanic of the game is flawed, then the game itself will be flawed. But do crappy extras make a game worse than it would without them? Is Brawl less fun because the online connectivity sucks?
Keep in mind whenever I see any arguments I don't immediately agree with I have a tendency to play the devil's advocate, whether I support the opposing argument or not. I do not in any way mean to say that things I'm referencing are beyond questioning or are in any way perfect. I'm just tired of people who complain simply because they're missing the point. read