Why do Wii games review so poorly?
Tuesday, February 12th, 2008 at 11:30am by Jack
Next Generation continues its love affair with line graphs and analytics today with a “review” of why Wii games — which sell sell yet review poorly — are such an enigma.
Maybe Wii games have lower review scores because we, as an industry, still don’t know what makes a good Wii game.
This isn’t proof mind you – we probably won’t know for a long time, if ever, why Wii games rate so much below par – but a failure to understand the platform and its potential is one possibility. Even if you dismiss that explanation, the fundamental question still remains: Why have games for the Wii, darling console of the media and the public for well over a year, reviewed so poorly and sold so well?
That first line hits it on the head as far as I’m concerned. The “standard” used by reviews today from which all reviews are compared for context isn’t “is this a good game,” it’s “how does this game compare to the games we’ve given great review scores to over the past 10 years?” Unfortunately, that’s the very essence of an echo chamber. FAIL.
The “games media” today is the result of 10+ years of grooming, free trips, perks and payoffs. Old habits, I’ve heard, die hard.
February 12th, 2008 at 11:44 am
I think Wii games review poorly because of the “graphics.” The Wii’s graphical power is always being compared to the 360, PS3 and even PC. They even compare the Wii’s controls to the other systems. They don’t consider the Wii’s limitations, set by the price ($250). For the limitations of the Wii, a lot of Wii games are great!
I think who doesn’t know what makes a good Wii game is the 3rd party developers. I’ve been looking around fro Brawl stuff, and most people have been going crazy over it. Nintendo Power gave it a 10 (They’re not biased, they gave the new Excite Bike game a 3.5), and I saw a magazine at Walmart with the page story: “Is SSBB the best game ever?… yes, it is.” Mario Galaxy had a higher rating on Metacritic than Zelda, Orcarina of Time got for a while. Both 1st party games.
February 12th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Because they come with free controllers.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Yes, they score lower because the graphics aren’t as good as the other consoles. They forget that Nintendo months before the Wii was released stated that the Wii was not going to be a graphics powerhorse. I think they should rate a game compared to that of other games on the same console, not of other consoles. If that were the case, no DS game would score over a 5 since the graphics just don’t compare to the 360 or PS3.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Its a combination of comparatively bad graphics, some very bad games, and an industry that doesn’t “get” the good ones. I can’t count how many times I’ve read the words, “broken”, “flawed” and “inaccurate” in regards to the controls on Wii games. My experience has been the opposite. I own a lot of Wii games and have played many more and in most cases, the controls are just fine……..as long as you throw out what you expect from a dual analog controller. Thats what reviewers have a hard time doing. The Wii is designed to be receptive to the non-gamer and lapsed gamer, while allowing the long time gamer a means by which to expand their gaming experiences. Many games have achieved that. Many others are cash ins. In my opinion, the cash ins shouldn’t take away from the ground breaking success that many games have had. Unfortunately, the law of averages is not a very kind task master and there are LOTS of shitty games on the Wii that are shitty, not because of the Wii, but in spite of it.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
I would say….because most of the Wii games aren’t very good. I’ve played way too many that some seem to believe should be considered good just because it has “different” controls. Different doesn’t mean good. Plus the controls/fun factor too many times are used as some sort of excuse as to why the graphics aren’t even good GameCube standards, and I’ve yet to play very many of said games where the controls/fun factor make up for it. A so-so game with unique controls is still a so-so game.
That isn’t to say the Wii doesn’t have great games, I just think they are pretty few and far between. That and now there seems to be this manufactured “snobby” like attitude among the diehard Wii fans that if you think a Wii game isn’t very good, then it’s obviously because you don’t “get” it. No…trust me….I DO get it. I just don’t like most of it.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Considering the ECSTATIC reaction I’ve seen by real-life people to some cosmetically flawed and poorly reviewed games (Carnival Games, anyone?) I think that most game reviewers are still suffering from “Barbie Horse Adventure” syndrome when it comes to Wii games. They just don’t want to be caught liking an embarrassing game, even if it turns out to be fun.
Yes, a lot of them are shovelware and/or have worse graphics than Gamecube games, but I think reviewers for the sites who have been stroking off so-called hardcore gamers for the last decade need to either take more of a “big picture” approach or have regular “second opinion by a normal Wii owner” boxes tacked on to qualify their reviews.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
You know last generation, when all the Nintendo fans claimed media bias and such, it was hard to agree with them. They had no evidence, sniveling snide comments from 30-year-old manchildren aside.
However, this generation basically confirms the Nintendo fans suspicion of ages old accusation. What with EGM basically condemning Endless Ocean with a non-review full of retarded jabs at non-games, with a follow up in the next issue that cajoled their readers complaints that they just waste a page of their magazine. Never mind that Endless Oceans prequel, a PS2 game named Everblue 2, somehow was fit to be called a game by EGM years ago, despite being the same game.
Mind you, this “score review” stuff has been brought up before. In regards to the DS, the PSP beat the DS in reviews for a long time, including IGN almost arbitrarily giving away 9.0’s to PSP games as if they were on some kind of quota system, while they scratched their heads at games like Nintendogs, Brain Training, and Animal Crossing (now classified a non-game.) The consumers have a different view and wouldn’t be caught dead with a PSP or its games as this is reflected in the abysmal software sales of the PSP, full of cheap ports. (Hey, that sounds familiar…) This is especially bad when 90% of the top selling PSP games are remakes or ports of old games. Yet somehow, a non-factor system with a bunch of cheap ports was beating the industry icon and trailblazing DS in reviews until the games started flowing. Funny how that works.
If all reviews and reviewers were equal and impartial, I might be more inclined to think about this statistic. But when the games press has made no bones its hatred for Wii, it’s hard to be surprised that they show this with their adolescent pettiness towards a market that disagreed with their favored choice of console.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
In fairness, the games that are actually reviewed poorly are actually pretty bad for the most part. Mario Galaxy, Zelda, Metroid, Zak and Wiki… all were reviewed quite well. Granted I’m baffled as to why Halo 3 would get a 10 and Galaxy got a 9.5, but that comes down to human nature… those game reviewers just personally liked Halo 3 more.
The other end of it is that modern game reviewers are a bit jaded. They play games for a living so they’ve developed very specific expectations. Wii meanwhile set out to create a system and games for the whole family, not just game reviewers. Video games have grown up along with my generation from simple “a= jump, b=run” games of my childhood to complex shooters with difficulty and content aimed at 20-somethings. That’s where the reviewers are too. Wii stepped back and decided to make a system kids could enjoy (while keeping things interesting enough for adults). Honestly, if you’re a single, 16-30, hardcore gamer, you really should be over in the 360 camp. If you’re a kid or have kids and a wife (or husband), the Wii is specifically made for you and it shows. That’s why I don’t think the Wii is effected by the “Next Gen Console War,” because there’s no reason for it to compete with 360 and PS3. It’s got it’s own audience and it does a damn good job of catering to them. The reviewers are very slowly realizing that and you’ll notice it’s the ones who are married with kids that are the first onto the bandwagon.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
While some games review poorly because they are, in fact, bad, there are many instances of ‘how do we review this’ syndrome.
Some games, like SSX Blur, are highly praised for the controls by IGN, but completely trashed for the controls by other sites.
It all has to do with the mentality of the reviewer.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
@residentialevil,
“That and now there seems to be this manufactured “snobby” like attitude among the diehard Wii fans that if you think a Wii game isn’t very good, then it’s obviously because you don’t “get” it.”
I hope you’re not referring to my comment about reviewers not “getting” Wii controls on some games because thats not what I was saying at all. I have no problem with people not liking a Wii game. My problem is when they describe controls as “broken” or “inaccurate” when in fact, they are just fine. SSX Blur was described above and thats a good example. I for one, have thought that I did “get” it and just didn’t like it, only to give the game more time and understanding then found a lot of enjoyment in it. Games like Carnival Games and Smarty Pants are great and misunderstood and therefore they get bad reviews. In fact, to illustrate the “getting it” even further, I’ll use your namesake. Resident Evil.
I think we can universally agree RE4 was a pretty damn good game. Well, I have a few friends who play a lot of FPS but had never played an RE game, nor really, any “horror” game. I told them they had to try it because it was so good. They sat down with RE4 and within minutes refused to continue. Why? The controls. They expected traditional FPS controls. They couldn’t move the way they wanted, they couldn’t peak around corners, they couldn’t strafe, they couldn’t OMG, wait for it, Run AND shoot!
They were literally horrified at how bad the game was. Am I snobbish for saying they don’t “get” it? Is their opinion that the game is bad valid simply because it’s not the game they wanted to play? This is the type of thing that happens with Wii games. They don’t control the way reviewers expect them too, they don’t play the way they want them to, and the time it takes a hardcore gamer to “get” the controls as they were intended is often more than a reviewer is willing to give.
I’ve met people who HATED SSX blur because they absolutely could not figure out how to pull off the Ubers. Some gave up and traded the game in, out of disgust. Others, myself included, kept a positive attitude and rethought things and once you figure it out, its perfectly simple. I admit, I didn’t “get” SSX controls early on. I was pretty disappointed actually. I had lots of trouble. But, I”m mature enough to admit when I don’t “get” a game. Hell, I’ll admit it, I don’t “get” a LOT of games. I don’t “get” KOTOR. I hate it. I would take Wii-Play over KOTOR in a heart beat. Does that mean KOTOR is a bad game? Absolutely not, but at least I recognize that I should not be reviewing it. Just like a hardcore gamer should think real hard about a review for something like Endless Ocean. Unfortunately, that’s clearly not happening. I mean, the problem with many wii games is not that they get below average scores, its that many reviewers give the HORRIBLE scores. This brings down the average to what we see. Look at Excite Truck, a great game. Some reviewers gave it 90’s and others, 50’s. Endless Ocean gets high 80’s and some in the TWENTIES! How many games have a range like that? Invariably, if you have people rating a game in the 50s and lower, its going to crush the games average.
I’m not saying the Wii has a huge and stellar library, but the library certainly is not as piss-poor as the averages would lead you to believe, unless of course you are a hardcore gamer looking for games like Halo, Rainbow Six, Mass Effect, etc. And thats the point, those are EXACTLY the types of games that reviewers drool over and those are the games the Wii lacks. Those games epitomize the direction of “more horsepower” and better graphics. Those game types are therefore naturally going to be fewer and further between on Wii. The thing is, between the PS3 and 360, we have TONS of those games. Thats why some of us are so thankful for the Wii, because its a refreshing and fun alternative to those games and styles that dominate the other consoles and have for years.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
I think we need to re-define what we mean by “games”… These reviewers are scoring the software based on a definition of games that is different from what consumers are searching.
The experience of exploring in Endless Ocean or swinging a club or a bat or a ball in Wii Sports has nothing to do with the intelectual immersion of a Starcraft or an Advance Wars, or the adrenaline-induced anger of a Halo 2 or a Call Of Duty 4.
Not too long ago I bought “Smart Girl’s Playhouse” for my 3-year old daughter based on a very favorable IGN review of the “game”, even though the game scored a 7.0. My girl loves it! The scores are based on an accumulated review that don’t mean anything if you don’t understand where the number is coming from.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Another thing… If you view the bar graph that the article refers to, you will see that the final average between Wii games and 360 games isn’t that big: it’s around 5 points! Don’t count the PS3 average, because it is based on fewer than two dozen games.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I wouldn’t say that Wii controls are broken or inaccurate, but quite often it’s difficult to figure out exactly how the game wants you to move the wii remote. And if you don’t do it just the way it wants you to… nothing happens or something different happens. This might lead people to say it’s inaccurate… but it’s a human inaccuracy not an inaccuracy in the remote itself. Either the player or the programmer is dropping the ball. Here’s an example: the sword battles in the next to final level of Zack & Wiki. I got through them, but I never actually figured out exactly how I was supposed to move the Wii remote to fight. Sometimes I’d swing and nothing happened at all. Other times I’d think I was holding it still and it would swing.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Jack, here’s another one, from the New York Times, to quote a non-gamer publication:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/arts/01game.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Consumers have indeed abandoned game reviewers…
February 12th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
I haven’t played enough Wii games but from what I’ve seen there’s a lot of shovelware out there and, with a new control scheme that isn’t made for traditional games, there are some titles out there that aren’t up to par yet.
That said, I’m playing Mario Galaxy right now and I am not feeling the love. I do not like 3D Mario in general but I’m enjoying Galaxy less than Sunshine. I always feel like I don’t have a good grip on Mario. I DESPISE the race and challenge stages, even when they’re easy. The overall look and feel of the game is far too cutesy (I don’t need blood and guts in my Mario but Sonic games are kid friendly but have such a cooler, hipper feel) and it feels like the outer space concept of the game was only tacked on to a substandard Mario adventure. And yet the critics love this game and I can’t fathom why they didn’t trash it.
I am looking forward to playing games that were designed specifically for the Wii that aren’t mini-game collections (Not counting Smash because I’ll probably be using my ‘Cube controller) but I’m low on cash. I have faith that someone will make something outstanding for the Wii that utilizes the wiimote in a simple and intuitive way that’s clever but it might take some time.
February 12th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
If you believe any recent Sonic game is as good or heaven forbid better than Mario Galaxy…
First… know that you are in the vast minority, only populated by certain Sony developers who seems to be more than a little jealous of it’s success. Second… well… We can agree to disagree. That’s as polite as you’ll probably get from anybody you’ll talk to about that.
February 13th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Sonic was “cooler” and “hipper” than Mario 17 years ago. Now Sonic is “kiddie” enough that Sega got so desperate as to release Shadow the Hedgehog. Shudder. Meanwhile, Mario moved into 3D successfully.
That said, count me in the “liked Sunshine better than Galaxy” club. It just feels a lot deeper, and different from other Mario games in ways that Galaxy was never meant to be. I’d much rather have seen a Sunshine with twice as many areas than Galaxy, but I guess you can only do an “our hero goes on vacation” game once per franchise.
February 13th, 2008 at 12:47 am
Hey, nice to see some Sunshine-love! Super Mario Sunshine is still one of my favourite games on any platform, ever. For years, I have struggled to understand the hate so many seem to have for that game.
But in regard to the topic…why do Wii games review so poorly? Like many here have also argued, I would honestly say it’s because most of them are just really bad. It’s that simple. It seems to me when there is a great game released on Wii, it reviews accordingly.
Galaxy. Twilight Princess. Corruption. Z-Dub. No More Heroes. All have reviewed generally well…very well, in fact. Granted, there seems to be a sector of reviewers that “just don’t get” some Wii titles (anyone who gives Trauma Center a bad review, for example), but their ignorance shouldn’t be reflected onto reviewers as a whole. I would say that the best Wii titles are usually given the scores they deserve.
I really disagree with this whole “down with review scores” movement. Game reviews are a good thing. They are there to serve the consumer, nothing more. Game reviewers are in a position, having played literally everything on a given console, to give a well-informed opinion on what is good and what isn’t…what is worth your $50, and what is a waste of that hard-earned money.
Whether they have superiority complexes or not, that is their core purpose. I think people should take their reviews as such. When gamers look to reviews for validation of a purchase or a franchise they really like, they are misusing them. When consumers ignore reviews, buy bad games and end up disappointed in their inherently sub-par Wii experience, they are misusing them, too.
Of course, reviews can be wrong in certain cases. A rabid Sonic fan may enjoy a terrible 3D Sonic game, making a bad review irrelevant for that particular gamer. But that doesn’t make the review wrong, or pointless. Nor does the fact that sometimes, reviewers might give the wrong score.
Hey, mistakes happen. Everyone makes them, not just reviewers. And an overwhelming majority of the time, I honestly think they get them right.
This is just my view, but I really think reviews are vital and serve an important purpose. The problem is not with the reviews, but the way consumers/gamers view them.
February 13th, 2008 at 8:14 am
I can see that many people had something to say, and here is what I have to say:
_ Before the Wii came out, so many “cool” things were suppose to happen and never did (i.e. WiFi connectivity with most games / DS compatibility / DS Station Download…)
_ AC was supposed to be out, and never did.
Overall, I think that the Wii was a great concept when it was still in the box, but NINTENDO does not seem to want to expand the Wii ability as much as they said they would. In result, the Wii is an unexploited console that stays in front of my TV, looking good, but not really doing any good.
February 13th, 2008 at 9:16 am
“I really disagree with this whole “down with review scores” movement. Game reviews are a good thing. They are there to serve the consumer, nothing more. Game reviewers are in a position, having played literally everything on a given console, to give a well-informed opinion on what is good and what isn’t…what is worth your $50, and what is a waste of that hard-earned money.”
But you’d hope that they are impartial when they have demonstrated time and again their prejudice and hostility towards Wii. Remember, some of these magazine’s APRIL FOOL’S Jokes in 2006 were that the “Revolution” would win the next console war. They were already at a position of disrespect and dismissal to begin with. Why should anybody believe their reviews now as if they know what’s in the best interest of the industry or something?
February 13th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
In fact, if I may have your attention, please peruse this Original Smash Bros. review from Electric Playground.
http://www.elecplay.com/reviews_article.php?article=411
Somehow I don’t think Nintendo gets too fair a shake no matter what they make.