Now I highly doubt any of you have a Playstation(the first one) and lots of games for it.But recently I pulled mine out looking for some game to play,and caught a glimpse of a game I loved.Tiny Tank.I never beat the game I remembered,but it was awesome.So I recently thought,why dont they remake it for the wii?Now I couldn't find any suggestions section on the nintendo site,but for you who even know what the game is,Don't You think it would be a great game to remake?Also,here are some reviews to back up my opinion:http://www.gamespot.com/ps/action/tinytank/ review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsbottomnav&tag=bottomnav; reviews
They support me except that last one.
ID:182413
 Jul 11 2008, 4:58 am
|
|
SuperAntx wrote:
Mudkippy wrote: I still have my wii,but i'll check those games out | |
Mudkippy wrote:
Now I highly doubt any of you have a Playstation(the first one) and lots of games for it. I still have mine and about 60 games for it. Though I havent had it hooked up in forever since I can just use my ps2 to play the games So I recently thought,why dont they remake it for the wii? Because any game made on the wii pretty much automaticaly sucks? Honestly, look through the review scores on ign.com or gameinformer. The average score for a wii game is about 3. Whereas the average for a ps3 or 360 game is about 8. As for good games, SuperAntx listed some good ones, A bunch of RPGs, but somehow left off the best one of all time! Star Ocean: The 2nd Story, every rpg fan should play this Intelligence Cube is a good game, though its a rare find Legend of Legaia is good, theres a sequel but I havent played it Castlevania SOTN, by far the best castlevania game The Jet Moto series is good (wonder why they stoped makin those) Brave Fencer Musashi, its like chibi-samurai zelda | |
Falacy wrote:
Because any game made on the wii pretty much automaticaly sucks? Honestly, look through the review scores on ign.com or gameinformer. The average score for a wii game is about 3. Whereas the average for a ps3 or 360 game is about 8. It's the fault of the publishers who decide that they shouldn't put good games in the Wii. Their only motive is to make money, and in many cases this produces bad games that otherwise would've been good. (Plus, Nintendo's first-party games are good ones.) | |
Naokohiro wrote:
It's the fault of the publishers who decide that they shouldn't put good games in the Wii. Their only motive is to make money, and in many cases this produces bad games that otherwise would've been good. No, the problem is: The wii-mote is a retarded idea and a horrible way to play games. Most of the games that recieved a decent score on the wii were made to be played without it, which pretty much eliminates the purpose of the wii; since the other 2 consoles can provide much higher quality graphics/games with already standard controlers | |
Falacy wrote:
No, the problem is: The wii-mote is a retarded idea Actually, it was a probably-decent, novel, innovative idea how to play games differently and make the experience more unique, involving and fun, rather than invariably just-button-mashing like most usual games. and a horrible way to play games. This might be true, depending on the game. I never actually played games on the Wii, though, so I only know about its general idea rather than actual game experience with it. | |
Falacy wrote:
No, the problem is: The wii-mote is a retarded idea and a horrible way to play games. You could've easily been one of those people that said the Nintendo DS was a bad idea when they first started to develop it. Anyways, I don't know where you're getting your information from, but I read an article in my Game Informer titled, "Why Do Good Games Go Bad?" While, it was not entirely Wii-based, they explained how publishers are the ones who control what is made and what system it's made for, as well as time constraints. (All from the perspective of the developers.) I remember reading a Wii article as well, though I can't remember the title. Basically, the publishers have full control over what games are being made and what system they're made for. (Publishers don't work on the games.) | |
Falacy wrote:
SuperAntx listed some good ones, A bunch of RPGs, but somehow left off the best one of all time! Only two of the games I listed were RPGs and Tactics is more of a board game anyway. Legend of Legaia is great for the most part. It scores some points for the unique combat and actually changing the character model depending on what armor you're wearing, but the overall graphic quality definitely shows its age. What really kills Legaia is the way a lot of the bosses bring the game to a grinding halt. With random (ie: forced) combat you'd think they could have bumped your level up by time you fight them, but they don't. You can walk into every room, open every chest, kill every monster, and still have to grind up a few levels just to stand a chance. There's a notoriously hard (somewhat legendary on certain forums) centaur boss who has single-handedly made people quit playing! The sequel is complete garbage. It's not even worth looking up a review. | |
Naokohiro wrote:
You could've easily been one of those people that said the Nintendo DS was a bad idea when they first started to develop it. Actualy I was more the opposite. When I first heard the wii was going to have a motion based control scheme; I thought it was an awsome idea. I thought it would play out like something I had though up a while back. Until I actualy played the wii and realized it was just that... MOTION based gameplay. Its not based on your actions, it doesnt reflect the way you move, it doesnt mirror what you do with the remote. Its simply motion based. You wiggle the stick around the game does whatever it feels like. Sure theres a few directional sensors that determine specific actions. But theyre not nearly accurate enough to make playing any game on the wii fun, skill based, or involving | |
Naokohiro wrote:
You're just like most of society. Misinformed on exactly what the Wii has to offer. lol how was I mis-informed by my own experiences playing it? | |
I don't have firsthand experience, but lack of one-to-one motion is a complaint I have heard in multiple reviews and podcasts. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the Wii is incapable of performing such a feat. It's just that there are supposedly few games that do so.
(Personally, I like the idea of the Wii-mote. However, I believe its only real innovation was being bundled with the system. Alternative input devices have been distributed separately before, but the lack of households owning them led to a lack of games supporting them and vice versa. Including the Wii-mote with the Wii created an install base so that developers would be tempted to support the device in their games.) | |
The Wii-mote is capable of one-to-one motion. People have been using the wii-mote as a cheap wireless IR detector for quite a few neat things (such as head tracking), so it's not so much that the wii wouldn't be capable of it, but rather than games are just not using it in games. Mario Kart for the wii is also supposed to work really well using the wheel peripheral, although I can't say how well it reflects one-to-one having not used it myself.
| |
Nick231 wrote:
The Wii-mote is capable of one-to-one motion. People have been using the wii-mote as a cheap wireless IR detector for quite a few neat things (such as head tracking), so it's not so much that the wii wouldn't be capable of it, but rather than games are just not using it in games. Mario Kart for the wii is also supposed to work really well using the wheel peripheral, although I can't say how well it reflects one-to-one having not used it myself. That video pretty much explains why the wii CANT to 1-1 tracking. Since the sensor you stick on the TV is used as the reference point; the remote cant be tracked directly. The best they could hope for would be some kind of preset input. ie: you hold the remote in a default position, and press a button. From then on that position would be marked as the central point for any motions. However I dont see that working very well, since you can phsyicaly move your body around with the remote, aside from just moving the remote itself Another thing that video points out is HOW the tracking works. It works just like the sixaxis in the ps3 remote. sixaxis meaning up/down left/right forward/back. The actual distances and positions themselves cant actualy be tracked (as far as I know) the system simply tracks those actions themselves which is another reason why 1-1 tracking wouldnt be possible. This also relates to my other post, where I said the wii recognizes some preset motions but for the most part just does whatever it feels like | |
Falacy wrote:
Nick231 wrote: You realize, that the movement itself, is the one-to-one motion right? tracking the two points based on distance you can do a lot with the x/y/z coordinates from the infrared lights? Changes in those coordinates can then be reflected in the virtual environment. Since the sensor you stick on the TV is used as the reference point; the remote cant be tracked directly. The best they could hope for would be some kind of preset input. Tracking would work using the wii-mote also, although it would only work if pointed at the sensor bar (whereas using the wii-mote as the "camera" you are able to track anywhere in the wii-mote's field of view. While complete one-to-one immersion isn't possible (no one has a living room big enough to be running around as if we were really in the game world). There are also the issues with certain things as I've mentioned in previous discussion threads (ie. Swing a sword in game and when you hit something in-game the sword stops, but your arm keeps going). There are other limitations also, but that doesn't mean it's not capable of it. | |
Nick231 wrote:
You realize, that the movement itself, is the one-to-one motion right? tracking the two points based on distance you can do a lot with the x/y/z coordinates from the infrared lights? Changes in those coordinates can then be reflected in the virtual environment. Thats what I'm sayin though. The thing cant actualy detect any type of x,y,z beacuase it has no central reference point. All it does it detect motion based on where its currently at | |
Falacy wrote:
Nick231 wrote: The central reference point is the wii-mote itself. For games like Zelda, the accelerometers are used to detect the quick motions, yes. Put it is perfectly capable of getting x/y/z coordinate data based on LED lights. 1 LED can be used quite well for things like whiteboard applications, it just converts the relative position based on previously set calibration points (much similar to touch based Whiteboards that cost thousands of dollars). 2 LED can be used for full 3D tracking. The position of either/both LED gives you the x,y coordinates. Since the two LED will generally be a fixed distance from each other, the z coordinate can be easily triangulated. | |
They never claimed to have one-to-one motion anyways, and how does that take away from a good game? None of the other systems have that either, and I don't see you complaining...
The Wii is innovative and intuitive technology, unlike the other systems which still do the same old thing as it's always been done. One-to-one tracking would not make a game any better... I don't see the control sticks on a ps3 or xbox360 controller having one-to-one tracking and yet they are somehow more popular than the Wii. Seems to me, people are afraid of change. ...And like he said it's possible. I just don't believe it would make a game more fun. (Which is why no developers have done it yet.) | |
I still have mine hooked up. I'm too poor to afford a Playstation 3. =(
If you're looking for some good games, try:
Final Fantasy Tactics
Chrono Cross
Megaman Legends 1 & 2
Metal Gear Solid
Crash Bandicoot 2
Legend of Dragoon