World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc.

pegasis you should post your source..

a new interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz8ZaWKNK...annel_page

A friend of mine played this at New York Comic Con, and said it controlled nearly as well as Red Steel. And looked as swell as Halo 2.

(Feb. 26, 2009  3:56 PM)PanzerDragoon Wrote: [ -> ]A friend of mine played this at New York Comic Con, and said it controlled nearly as well as Red Steel. And looked as swell as Halo 2.

LOL, and no carp, halo 2 is a previous-gen game. as expected the developers lied when they said 360-graphics lol

I think he may have been exagerating about the Red Steel comment... 'cause that game controlled horribly.

But with Wii motion + they will make wii game controls far better.

how are the controlers bad when they are completely customizable down to the smallest detail?
i mean u can make ur own contorls! so how can it be bad? or do u mean the whole pointer idea and the motion thing is bad?

Considering it was my friend and compared it to Red Steel. I'm going to say the motions don't fully register with the Wii.

He said it looked very bland, with somewhat weak AI, and generally ragged on it. He said he liked the DragonBall Evolution PSP game more then this (not surprising, Namco Bandai didn't go around boasting), which he also got to play at New York Comic Con.

new:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xq87xDHO...=72&fmt=18

check the multi player:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56i1q67nRew

Who cares about graphics... If the controls are cool, it doesn't look like TOTAL carp, and the gameplay is nice, why does HD and having "360 graphics" matter? I personally own a Wii and 360, and I do prefer the 360's graphics capabilities, if the core gameplay is fun, it shouldn't have to rely on graphics to be a good game.

And that's what this game seems to be doing. I think they should focus less on making it look good and more on improving the actual game.

EDIT: Looked at the multiplayer. If it has WiFi, it would be awesome. But then again, FPS's don't take much to be fun as long as it's online.

I have lots of friends that constantly bash the Wii just because of bad graphics, they don't even take into acount the gameplay. I'm not that botherd about graphics, but they do look nice on 360 and PS3.

(Apr. 15, 2009  11:30 PM)NeekAlert Wrote: [ -> ]I have lots of friends that constantly bash the Wii just because of bad graphics, they don't even take into acount the gameplay. I'm not that botherd about graphics, but they do look nice on 360 and PS3.

Heh, I've seen this sort of bashing happen all the time. It's sad. Maybe that's why developers have to work so hard to make something that's aesthetically pleasing because they know it will sell more. Since obviously the majority chooses games for their looks.

This is why it'll take the world so long to get a perfect game. Although many games today are great, there's always something to bring it down. The multiplayer isn't expansive enough, the storyline sucked, the controls were too awkward could not be changed, etc.

i said before that graphics are important for certain games. and i believe it is important for fps.
and btw it has online commie.

People bash the Wii because it's a garbage cash-in by Nintendo. The graphics in this game look decent, but the art direction is really bland. People aren't sick of a lack of good graphics, they're sick of a lack of visual originality and effort.

but this game has nothing to do with Nintendo. its from HVS and the publisher is Sega.
i find the art meh.

(Apr. 16, 2009  6:08 AM)pegasis Wrote: [ -> ]but this game has nothing to do with Nintendo.

You guys were talking about people disliking the Wii so I provided my side of that.

i guess your right. most people i know dislike it for its childish games. and rare core games.
but i really liked the motion controls idea and i believe nintendo will make it better in their next console along with making the system HD. the only things that worry me that if they made the same thing they are making now...focusing on family and childish games.

It has nothing to do with games being family friendly or childish. Mario Kart, Ocarina of Time, Animal Crossing, these were all great games well received by critics. It's not about that. It's about a lack of originality, about a stagnation of Nintendo's typically great design philosophy.

(Apr. 16, 2009  5:56 AM)Bey Brad Wrote: [ -> ]People bash the Wii because it's a garbage cash-in by Nintendo. The graphics in this game look decent, but the art direction is really bland. People aren't sick of a lack of good graphics, they're sick of a lack of visual originality and effort.

Madworld has origional visuals...

(Apr. 16, 2009  11:17 AM)NeekAlert Wrote: [ -> ]Madworld has origional visuals...

also no more heroes... but those are still not enough

(Apr. 16, 2009  5:56 AM)Bey Brad Wrote: [ -> ]People bash the Wii because it's a garbage cash-in by Nintendo.

You should check out some of Sean Malstrom's articles, I posted about them here: http://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Gaming-R...#pid127020 ... and everyone seemed to ignore them!

He talks about various topics regarding Nintendo's successful disruption of the video games industry through using the Blue Ocean Strategy (among a few other interesting things). I honestly don't understand everything just yet, but I believe that the Wii (and the DS) are much more than simply a "garbage cash-in" by Nintendo. Nintendo realized where the industry was heading, where they stood, and proceeded to brilliantly box both Sony and Microsoft into their own dwindling market. It goes much, much deeper than this, but I was just trying to sum things up here haha

By our own standards for games however, I agree with most peoples opposition to what the Wii has done to Nintendo and the industry.

(Apr. 16, 2009  11:17 AM)NeekAlert Wrote: [ -> ]Madworld has origional visuals...

There's exceptions to every rule.

And Kei, nobody argues that Nintendo's business model wasn't financially successful. Artistically successful is another story.

(Apr. 16, 2009  9:48 PM)Bey Brad Wrote: [ -> ]And Kei, nobody argues that Nintendo's business model wasn't financially successful. Artistically successful is another story.

I know. What I should have mentioned is about the entire casual vs. hardcore debate we all seem to inevitably have these days. Both the Wii and the DS, among other things have ushered in the "Social/Interface Cycle" (see: Theory of Cycles by Sean Malstrom http://thewiikly.zogdog.com/article.php?article=3&ed=1). Since the Wii and the DS are a large factor in the amount of "casual" titles on the market now, many of the core gamers who grew up playing games in the "Cinema Cycle" have felt threatened by these "dumbed down" types of games. I am not well versed in all of the things in Sean has talked about in his articles, but after reading a few of them, I think he really has a lot of great things to say about video games.

I went on a bit of a tangent, but really, what it comes down to is that the Wii is a new type of entertainment. The video games industry is evolving and the Wii and DS are just a progression (or even regression in a sense if you consider this generations parallels to the NES era http://thewiikly.zogdog.com/article.php?article=29&ed=2 ). With the Wii and the DS, Nintendo simply identified what consumers wanted: easily grasped and fun experiences.

Really, just read Sean's articles lol, my attempts are describing his ideas are not terribly accurate.

What exactly do you mean by "artistically"?

---

Just read this article by Sean. It actually pertains well to all of this: The Sick Obsession of Culture in the Game Industry

Here are a few quotes:
"Everything Nintendo is doing with the Wii shows that it is not paying any homage to ‘game culture’ but, rather, trying to make new customers and generate new interest. So the common attacks on Nintendo always come down to two things:

”Nintendo is destroying gaming!” That Nintendo is destroying the ‘game culture’.

”Nintendo only wants to make money! [Inserts a Scrooge Mcduck picture and thinks it is clever]” That Nintendo’s only desire is ‘commercial’, to ‘make money’. I’m amazed people don’t think Sony and Microsoft have ‘commercial’ desires. There are people out there who really believe the Xbox 360 or PS3 was put out there, at great cost to Microsoft and Sony, just to ‘progress’ the ‘game culture’."

...

"The purpose of games, just like all entertainment, is to please the customers. This is why games with high sales are the best since it shows these games are pleasing the most people.

It is not that ‘game culture’ has a future, it is that ‘game culture’ never truly existed. We’re better off looking at games in how they affect customers as whimsical and fun experiences."

I don't necessarily agree with everything he said in the article; I would have to read it again. He does seem to have a bias towards arcade style gameplay due to his age, but he does put forth some great points about how people have begun to perceive video games.

Also relevant, and equally priceless: Are Casual Games Killing Gaming Part 45,675,656

... Sorry if this post seems a bit scattered. I've written it in between reading the previous two articles I've linked to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siZMFWjC7js

---

his hair XD