Wii Sports. Tennis is nowhere near as responsive as it should be though and where are the legs of the Baseball players?

I quite enjoy Wii Sports, it's simple but a hella fun multiplayer game.

Tennis is actually my favorite of the 5 games, because it's the one game 4 people can participate in at once, a lot of fun, I love Bowling too. Baseball and Boxing gets pretty monotonous fast on single player but they're a lot more fun when playing with a friend or two.

The only one I don't like at all is Golf, I really suck at that one. It's no Mario Golf, put it that way.

my point is that it's a cash grab / inferior product. like getting a big mac wrap when you ask for a full big mac meal.

Just because a game is short dosen't mean it's bad. Sometimes you just want to kill a few hours before work or an appointment. Plus how long a game is depends on perspective.

In the old days, most games had 6-12 stages, and most of them can be sped through in 20/30 minutes, anything more than that would be considered long.

Nowadays, if it's something that takes you up to 12 hours to play through, if you can do it all in a day, it's considered too short.

Interesting how that works.

That's a stupid way of putting it. Short games aren't bad games. They're just short. The Devil May Cry games are pretty short but they're awesome. Same with God of War.

Like they always say, quality over quantity.

Games back then didn't have a memory card. They were easy to get into and play.

It's annoying having a game that invests so much into the CGI cutscenes and other bull that the actual game ends up only being 5-6 hours.

Games these days cost 60$, you can't blame people for feeling entitled to more.

Games in general aren't that much more expensive than they were 20 years ago. And back then nobody complained about a game only having 6 levels if it took them a long freaking time to beat it.

Back then they couldn't put as much content into a game obviously, so to pad it out they had to keep it challenging enough to make sure it had a lot of replay value and make the game seem as long as possible. That's one reason the old games are so much harder than what we have today, because now that games have so much content and weeks worth of gameplay, it dosen't seem to matter if their difficulty level makes Kirby seem like Ninja Gaiden.

So, short and challenging or long and easy? That all goes down to personal preference of course. But the lack of difficulty is one thing that bugs me about modern games, now sure not all classic games are hard. Sonic is a cakewalk and Mario and Zelda have never been too hard, but they make up for it with tremendous replay value and extra goodies that are optional but take more time and effort to earn, like collecting all the chaos emeralds or finding all of Hyrules hidden treasures .

I find today's market to be too overcrowded with shooters that are extremely monotonous and offer too much instant gratification too fast, and they get boring quickly. Now I'm not saying the difficulty determines a games quality, absolutely not, Sonic and Kirby are among my favorite franchises after all. But while platformers and action/adventures can be fun on any difficulty level, I at least expect some challenge from my shooters.

One reason why shoot em ups > first person shooters.

Pretty much any triple AAA title has multiple difficulties. Not to mention achievments/trophies for the "100%" people.

Honestly boo boo, you bring up the same points again and again, but just how many of these shooters have you played?

I find having to find the same ****ing boomerang over and over again in zelda to be monotonous.

If you want difficulty, try playing any multi player FPS online.

Yeah but some of those games are easy even on the highest difficulty setting. Now Goldeneye, that game was a cold motherf*cker when on hard mode, especially that antenna level, holy sh*t.

Not a whole lot, but that's because I'm not a fan.

Just like how your standard 360 fanboy hasn't played a lot of Nintendo games but of course that dosen't stop them from talking sh*t about them either. And yeah, I have a serious bias against modern gamers, I won't lie.

And it has a lot to do with their lack of respect or understanding of where and how the video game industry started. If they prefer the "hardcore" FPS experience to old school platforming, more power to them. But I'd respect them more if they didn't bitch so much about how Nintendo and Sega only make "kiddie" games. It's those kiddie games that built the whole foundation of console gaming.

Enlighten me on how going through neverending amounts of Flood over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over until you lose your f*cking mind is any better.

Yeah, I'd rather play games that don't shout stupid obscenities and homophobic slurs at me, thank you.