Worst console launch evar?

kaimera

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155480

For all the 360 bashing reagrding it's launch, it still had the best launch titles when compared to the ps3 & the wii.

and the poor wii has the worst launch titles of the 3 consoles.

Worst evar is the ps1, with the n64 having the best [albeit cos it only launched with two a-list games].

I thought it was interesting.

RE*AC*TOR

Its all based on averages. 360 had a lot of ok launch titles, none really standing out that much. Wii has probably the best launch title since Mario 64 on the N64 in Zelda:TP, but its average is dragged down by a lot of movie/cartoon tie-ins (THQ). Its arguable that Resistance is better than any of the Xbox 360 launch titles. Its a stupid article.

kaimera

I know it's based on averages.

So it's stupid cos its based on the average of all the games released and not just the good ones?

pfft.

RE*AC*TOR

Its stupid because the average of all games released only matters if someone buys all the games released.

Gizzle

Ye wha'?! Xbox 360 had better launch titles than Wii will have?!

Lets make an objective comparison of the three next gen consoles launch titles;

Xbox 360: Project Gotham 3, Perfect Dark Zero, Call of Duty 2, Kameo, Condemned

Wii: Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Far Cry Vengeance, Call of Duty 3, Need for Speed Carbon, Splinter Cell: Double Agent.

PS 3: Call of Duty 3, Fight Night: Round 3, Genji: Days of the Blade, Tony Hawk Project 8, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance.

Killer apps are highlighted....

Gonzo

I thought Metroid Prime 3: Corruption was also a wii launch title?? When is that coming out?

kaimera

Ye wha'?! Xbox 360 had better launch titles than Wii will have?!

Lets make an objective comparison of the three next gen consoles launch titles;

Xbox 360: Project Gotham 3, Perfect Dark Zero, Call of Duty 2, Kameo, Condemned

Wii: Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Far Cry Vengeance, Call of Duty 3, Need for Speed Carbon, Splinter Cell: Double Agent.

PS 3: Call of Duty 3, Fight Night: Round 3, Genji: Days of the Blade, Tony Hawk Project 8, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance.

Killer apps are highlighted....

Clearly very objective there Gizzle...:rolleyes: Missing a few I'd say; Resistence for one.

Its stupid because the average of all games released only matters if someone buys all the games released.

Arse. Then why the hell bother to release the **** games at launch? Somebody had to buy them. Muppets of the highest order or not.

The average matters because all the games are launch titles, not just the 'good' games.

zAbbo

January.

Wii is also launching without Mario (Galaxy) which is out in January as well.

Wii will also have Virtual Console games available on launch, like The Legend of Zelda, Super Mario 64 and Sonic the Hedgehog.

Zelda seems to be the best launch title since SM64 10 years ago

Retr0gamer

Metroid Prime 3 is delayed until sometimes in the first quarter of next year unfortunately.

Ridiculous article. There isn't one game on the xbox 360 launch that I wanted or would bother playing. The Wii has zelda, a continuation of unarguably the greatest videogame series of all time. Using gameranking averages is stupid.

If you want a bad launch look at the PS2. There wasn't a good game out on it until GTA3 about 9 months later. Fantavision was good but could have been done on the PS1 and then Tekken Tag, a game cobbled together in 6 months.

As for the PS1 being the worst? For me it was one of the best. Sega had just released Daytona USA on the saturn which was a very poor conversion. Sony bring out the PS1 with an arcade perfect port of Ridge Racer, at the time the best looking game around. It practically sealed Segas faith as the loser in that generation. If they want to look at bad launches they could have looked at monstrosities like the 3DO, Jaguar and Amiga CD32.

Kinetic^

I don't think the 360 had a bad launch at all.

COD2 and PGR3 were great games, and still are 1 year on.

PD0 didn't last as long as the first 2 I mentioned but it has the best mulitplayer options from any game out so far and plays flawlessly online.

Haven't played Kameo or Condemned as of yet so can't comment.

RE*AC*TOR

kaimera wrote:

Clearly very objective there Gizzle...:rolleyes: Missing a few I'd say; Resistence for one.



Arse. Then why the hell bother to release the **** games at launch? Somebody had to buy them. Muppets of the highest order or not.

The average matters because all the games are launch titles, not just the 'good' games.

Utter twaddle. By that logic if you took Zelda and the 3 lowest scoring games out of the Wii launch it would be a better launch because the average was higher.

flogen

kaimera wrote:

Arse. Then why the hell bother to release the **** games at launch? Somebody had to buy them. Muppets of the highest order or not.

The average matters because all the games are launch titles, not just the 'good' games.

Any console will want as many games as possible for launch, even if that means plenty of fat - we've seen it with every console launch, the DS being one that springs (or should that be Sprung?) to mind.

I think it'd be better to decide a good/bad launch on the number of well recieved/reviewed games, the number of consoles available and the quality of 3rd party support on day 1 (which is where most console launches fall down... they might have plenty of support but none of it any good).

smash

I presume you've all seen http://www.smashmyps3.com/

Gizzle

kaimera wrote:

Clearly very objective there Gizzle...:rolleyes: Missing a few I'd say; Resistence for one.
QUOTE]


I'll give you Resistence alright, I just randomly picked five games from each launch omitting only (IMHO) utter tripe, didn't think the 360, Wii and PS3 launch list would benefit from titles like Amped 3,Super Fruit Fall, & NFL '07 respectively.

And regarding objectivity, I can honestly say I'm one of the lucky few/total gobsh*tes (who aren't gaming journos) who has all the current gen home consoles and will have 2/3 of the next gen consoles within the next month, so I like to look at the quality of games as opposed being a "fanboy" for a particular company.

And as already stated in an above post, TTP is a continuation of one of the universally best loved and most enjoyable franchises, if not the "best". Can you say TTP isn't a killer app?

As always, I am totally open to being proven completely wrong...

TheAlmightyArse

Indeed, that's a disturbingly simple-minded article. By the same logic, the PS1 would be one of the worst consoles ever, given the huge amount of crap released for it over its life, and ignoring its significant number of gems.

Gizzle

Gonzo wrote:

I thought Metroid Prime 3: Corruption was also a wii launch title?? When is that coming out?

Q1 '07 is the word on the streets.

Pretty sure Galaxy isn't a launch title, March 12th '07 release date in the States.

Balfa

Gizzle wrote:

Q1 '07 is the word on the streets.

Pretty sure Galaxy isn't a launch title, March 12th '07 release date in the States.

Ah, at least we'll get Warioware in the meantime to tide us over err... wait a sec, I just looked at the release dates and Europe is getting warioware a month before the US! Arrghhh...

Balfa

And another "by Kaimera's logic..."

If one console launched with ten games that score 100%, and 100 games that scored 1% (avg 10%), would it be considered a far worse launch that a console that launched with ten 50% games (avg 50%) and nothing else?

steviec

Balfa wrote:

And another "by Kaimera's logic..."

If one console launched with ten games that score 100%, and 100 games that scored 1% (avg 10%), would it be considered a far worse launch that a console that launched with ten 50% games (avg 50%) and nothing else?

Yes but that's not the case is it?

The PS3 has twice as many 80%+ games as the Wii according to Metacritic. Now I haven't played either console so I can't say if I agree or not but in general the averages of all the gaming sites can't be that far off. It's pretty close between the two at least, of course that's obviously offset by the difference in price.

Sure the Wii has Zelda. And if Sony took the same strategy as Nintendo and delayed God of War or Shadow of the Colossus or any of the other brilliant PS2 games released in the last year and packaged them as a PS3 game they'd have been slated for it.

Launches are fairly meaningless. The PSP had a stronger launch than the DS. The Dreamcast had one of the strongest launches of all. A year from now nobody will remember. It just never ceases to amaze me how quick everyone is to jump on any article that dares to claim the Wii isn't the best thing ever.

TheAlmightyArse

It's a ridiculous way to rate a console's launch, as people have pointed out; giving more kudos for a few mediocre games, than one excellent one and a shower of ****. I don't see how it's necessarily got anything to do with Wii vs PS3 or anything. It's just rubbish games journalism.

1huge1

yes i've to agree with most people here i think wii had the best launch so far (though it isnt finished) not that the x box 360 was bad or anything
but i have to admit from what i read the ps3 launches had big problems like stick and people just buying them to sell on ebay (though i suppose they all have that)

flogen

steviec wrote:

Yes but that's not the case is it?

The PS3 has twice as many 80%+ games as the Wii according to Metacritic. Now I haven't played either console so I can't say if I agree or not but in general the averages of all the gaming sites can't be that far off. It's pretty close between the two at least, of course that's obviously offset by the difference in price.

That's fair enough; while it's always subjective I'd have no problem with a launch being rated by the number of, for example, 80%+ titles it comes out with (with the PS3 having more than twice the amount of the Wii according to metacritic*)... but to say that a console should suffer because a load of devs decided to throw a load of fat into the mix is stupid; as has been stated, I'd rather see a console launch with 10 great games and 100 crap ones than 5 great games and 5 crap ones.

*Interestingly both machines have the same number of high-scoring "green" reviews... I guess it depends on the way you look at it

Zombrex

It is a ridiculous article :rolleyes: (as has been pointed out)

Averaging the launch title scores means nothing.

Buying a crap game and a brilliant game doesn't mean you end up with the same average experience as buying 2 ok games. I would rather play one brilliant game than 2 ok games, and I wouldn't buy the crap game in the first place.

The only way to judge a consoles launch is to count the number of A++ games, ignoring the ok and bad games. The higher the number, the better the launch. You then work down to the ok games, and then the bad games

A console that launches with 2 brilliant games and 3 bad ones is a better launch (from the gamers point of view) than a console that launches with 5 average games. Console makers need the "must buy" games to draw people to buy the console in the first place.

koneko

Shoddy journalism from 1Up.com???? I could have never imaged such a thing. They were never wonderful, but in the last few weeks they've done a great job of making themselves completely irrelevant. They're a joke.

Gizzle

A ridiculous article that's getting quite a number of replies...

No such thing as bad publicity!

As other have stated in previous posts, I believe that "must have" games as opposed to "good/ok" games, make the launch, and from what I can see, Nintendo is the one of the three to take that and run with it. Could they have jumped the gun a bit in releasing Zelda as a launch title? Could it have benefitted from a few more months in development? Probably, but it's still being touted by some as even better than Ocarina of Time, which has been rated as the best game ever by a few sources.

RE*AC*TOR

Gizzle wrote:

A ridiculous article that's getting quite a number of replies...

No such thing as bad publicity!

As other have stated in previous posts, I believe that "must have" games as opposed to "good/ok" games, make the launch, and from what I can see, Nintendo is the one of the three to take that and run with it. Could they have jumped the gun a bit in releasing Zelda as a launch title? Could it have benefitted from a few more months in development? Probably, but it's still being touted by some as even better than Ocarina of Time, which has been rated as the best game ever by a few sources.

What are you talking about?

1. Publicity for who? 1UP.com? They are one of the most popular gaming sites on the net, because they have a history of integrity. This does nothing to reinforce that.

2. More time in development for Zelda? You must be nuts, its been in development for ages, it was supposed to be released a year ago on the cube. By all accounts its completely polished and is one of the longest games released in recent times.

projectmayhem

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

2. More time in development for Zelda? You must be nuts, its been in development for ages, it was supposed to be released a year ago on the cube. By all accounts its completely polished and is one of the longest games released in recent times.

made my point for me. zelda has been in development for so long even valve are jealous

Zombrex

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

2. More time in development for Zelda? You must be nuts, its been in development for ages, it was supposed to be released a year ago on the cube. By all accounts its completely polished and is one of the longest games released in recent times.

If Nintendo had had more time with the Wii version they probably would have over hauled the graphics system. One of the few criticisms of the new Zelda is that it is really a GameCube graphic engine running on a Wii. The Wii is 3 to 4 times as powerful as the GameCube, and it also has more space on its storage system and RAM.

If Nintendo had had a few more months with Zelda it would probably look and sound a bit better (a bit more "next-gen") than it does at the moment. It is more a show case for the new controller than the graphical ability of the Wii, and that is probaby where Nintendo focused most of its time in moving the GC version to the Wii.

RE*AC*TOR

Wicknight wrote:

IThe Wii is 3 to 4 times as powerful as the GameCube, and it also has more space on its storage system and RAM.

I don't think that's remotely true, its certainly not based on any "facts".

Can you explain why the Wii is 3 or 4 times more powerful than the GAMECUBE to me?

melekalikimaka

the Wii isn't a 'gamers' console as such, its more an attempt to tap a market that hasnt been reachable before, by going agaist the grain releasing and low priced console to for mass market with a gimiky controller, the back catalog of games to hit the people who've 'moved on' for console gaming, they basically are going for the left overs of the xbox and playstation, exceptions of course are the zelda/nintendo heads(i'm a zelda head btw). it just seems to me nintendo really have accfepted defeat after the gamecube, and are focusing on portable gaming, reminds me of another console making of the 90's...SEGA

thank god this wasn't in the nintendo forum

BlitzKrieg

If you want a bad launch look at the PS2. There wasn't a good game out on it until GTA3 about 9 months later. Fantavision was good but could have been done on the PS1 and then Tekken Tag, a game cobbled together in 6 months.

Didnt Zone Of Enders launch with the PS2 and MGS 2 hobbled in a few months later?

Or am I out of touch? At the time of the PS2 launch I was snuggling my Dreamcast...