Nintendo Wii Fanboy

Based on data pulled from GameRankings, folks over at GameFunk have prepared the nice little chart above. Apparently, Wii games don't get that great of marks from reviewers. Compared to the marks of games on other consoles, it makes the Wii's library look even worse!

Here's the numbers:

• Xbox 360: 374 games: 26% good, 24% bad
• PS3: 122 games: 33% good, 17% bad
• Wii: 189 games: 11% good, 37% bad

But, before you punch your computer monitor in a fit of rage, know this: the Wii does have a lot of shovelware. It's just the price of success, as publishers and developers see the console as a means to make money. And that's what they're in it for.

Also, keep in mind that the PS3 and Xbox 360 don't have Metroid Prime 3: Corruption or No More Heroes. So they pretty much lose.

[Via Joystiq]

GameSetWatch had an interesting discussion post up today about review scores and their utility for mainstream gamers. This especially applies to Wii games, for which the "mainstream" is significantly more mainstream, consisting of a lot of new gamers with totally different expectations for a good game.

Reviews tend to be written by jerks like me who have been playing games every day for 20+ years and expect not only innovation, but quality relative to that whole history of gaming. We may require a lot more out of our games: replayability, novelty, graphics, etc. More casual gamers, on the other hand, don't care about the same things we do. They just want a fun game, whether it's nice looking, short, or even licensed. Easily-understood controls and goals seem to be of utmost importance. Seemingly, so does a basis in real-world activities, like, for example, Carnival Games. So do our reviews, written as they are from our own perspectives, really serve the expanded Wii audience? And how do we tailor our impressions to their needs?

What is even more interesting to us than that aspect of the discussion is that even within "casual" games, what we see as a bad game often becomes very popular. The balancing act for reviewers is to make sure we judge casual games accurately as casual games, and try to realistically gauge whether the problems we have with them would be problems for, say, Grandma. Long-standing series are an interesting issue, as brought up by Simon Carless in regards to Bust-a-Move Bash! Is it a bad game because it fails to improve upon previous games? If so, that realistically would not matter to someone who just got their first game system.

The Wii was the highest-reviewed console of the year according to customer reviews aggregated by Reevoo. Compare that to every games-of-the-year list you've seen on any multiplatform site to get an idea of the disconnect between reviewer and fan opinions.

SSX Blur didn't exactly receive unanimous approval. Many thought that the Wii controller was going to be a perfect fit for the trick-heavy snowboard series, and while some continued to think that after playing it, other reviewers were nonplussed.

EA Montreal's Eric Chartrand, who recently revealed Nintendo's Mii stinginess, responded to the cumulative critical "meh" his last game received, saying "The reaction to the game was very... how can I say that... interesting." He goes on to talk about wildly varying feelings about the effectiveness of the control scheme. He also suggested that the gaming press were disproportionately negative about the controls, and that the public enjoyed the game more than reviews would indicate.

What did you think about Blur? Did you find it "serviceable and enjoyable at times" or do you agree with Chartrand that it was a "damn fine game"?

[Update: fixed a broken link.]

Update: Finally, the reviews are rolling in. We've updated the post with plenty of more scores.

With SSX: Blur being available at retailers today, the reviews are rolling in kind of late. As of right now, only two online outlets have reviewed the game, giving it very decent scores. Looks like many of you who were hoping for a game from a third-party with the same attention to detail that many of Nintendo's first-party titles receive may just be getting their wish. Many of the popular online outlets have yet to review the game, so keep in mind we'll be updating the post when their reviews go live.

Without further delay, let's check out what some of the critics had to say:

• Game Informer (85/100) says the controls aren't as precise as they would've liked them to be: "The one real problem I have with this game is that the ubertrick system doesn't work nearly as well as it should. The new controls do add something new to the series, but almost the entire time I pined for something more traditional."

• GameTrailers (84/100) finds the experience to be authentic: "It replicates the feeling of sliding down a mountain side with eerie precision and manages to make other control schemes feel dated. There's certainly plenty of opportunity for improvement with the sequel, but with a ton of content and even more fun, it's hard to go wrong with SSX Blur."

• GameDaily (80/100) says that eventhough the game lacks online play, it's still quite fun: "No online play hurts, and the two-player split screen mode offers limited enjoyment, but overall, EA successfully "blurs" the line between realism and fantasy, creating a great video game for all ages."

• 1UP (55/100) finds the game prevents you from really getting into the flow: "No matter how badly you want to get into the game, to find the flow...the game doesn't let you. And that's too bad, because it really does look great, the multiplayer mode is basic yet competent, and there are flashes of true SSX brilliance."

• GamePro (50/100) says it takes too long to figure out the game's controls: "Dedicated (read: sadistic) gamers willing to invest the time necessary to figure out the controls might get a kick out of this one, but the convoluted controls will turn off most players. The lesson here is clear: Wii developers need to start with a blank slate rather than graft old-school control schemes onto the Wii Remote because, as SSX Blur demonstrates, it just doesn't work."

Console games, at fifty or even sixty dollars, represent a very significant purchase for many of us. And yet, many if not most gamers seem to have a tendency to pick up games on day one, without so much as a rental or demo to validate their purchase. They read the previews and look at composite scores, and then essentially gamble that they'll enjoy whatever title they've purchased.

True, there are reviewers with whom people generally tend to agree. But how do you guys make your decisions, if not with a trial run first? Do you trust a specific company to deliver quality, or believe that a sequel to your favorite franchise will do justice to the series? Will you not purchase a game you were looking forward to if the game receives lower-than-expected ratings, such as the recent Sonic and the Secret Rings? Come one, come all, to the comments section! Right this way ....