EGM article on Wii says, cheap, crap games are signs of a healthy system

In the newest EGM, there's this long article about why the Wii has so many bad, cheap and terrible games. I won't write excerpts on the whole article, but this comment stood out:

The president of EE Fund Management President Ted Pollak says this about the Wii's flood of bad ports and cheap games. He claims, "When you have cheap, crap games, that's a sign of a healthy system." He goes on to say, "There's so much interest in making games for the DS/Wii that out of every five or six games, there's going to be a gem."

EGM responds in saying, "Pollak does have a point--it may be extremely easy to get a title approved on a Nintendo system, but that also means publishers and developers can take a lot more risks when making something completely new. Still that means wading through tons of terrible software in order to find one title that doesn't totally suck."

I kind of disagree and agree with Pollak at the same time. There are some gems like Trauma Center, Zak & Wiki, Dewey's Adventure, etc. that are totally original and creative taking new approaches to gaming. But there's more terrible software over all those gems. Well, the PS1 had tons of terrible software, so did the SNES/NES...but then so did the N64.

But it's only the beginning of the Wii's run so there's so much time left to see what devs. will do with the Wii. I personally look to the DS's successful run whenever I have doubts about the Wii. There are tons of crap in the DS's library, but among those, there's also a lot of awesome games for sure. And the hits just keep on coming like Dragon Quest IX, Final Fantasy, Ninja Gaiden, etc. And where else can you play games like Professor Layton, Hotel Dusk, Trauma Center, and Phoenix Wright? I hope games like these come to the Wii as well.

EGM concludes by saying this obvious remark: " Well, at least one thing will always remain the same: Nintendo's first-party developed games will continue to be the best releases you'll find on the DS and Wii." That we can all agree to.

Heh, I thought this was going to be a fanboyish post for a second there. :P

I mean, the guy is speaking some truth... the PS2 had a ton of cheap, crap games, but it also had a ton of good games.

See, to me it doesn't matter what the proportion is of good games to bad ones, because bottom line is that I don't play the bad games. I'm only going to play the good ones. A bunch of terrible games might be indicative of certain trends, but from the perspective of a gamer, they're totally irrelevant. Unless you're employed to review them, but that's another problem.Oilers99

Agreed I consider the 32/64 bit gen to be the best era in gaming history but I also consider it to have by far the highest ratio of bad to good games. *X out the 8 bit era*.

Heh, I thought this was going to be a fanboyish post for a second there. :P

I mean, the guy is speaking some truth... the PS2 had a ton of cheap, crap games, but it also had a ton of good games.

Funkyhamster

This is 100% true.

See, to me it doesn't matter what the proportion is of good games to bad ones, because bottom line is that I don't play the bad games. I'm only going to play the good ones. A bunch of terrible games might be indicative of certain trends, but from the perspective of a gamer, they're totally irrelevant. Unless you're employed to review them, but that's another problem.Oilers99