Rockstar reveals Manhunt 2 for the PS2, PSP, and ... Wii

Christ I hated Manhunt... I love Splinter Cell, but I thought Manhunt was a step-by-step guide to how not to do a stealth game. Sure, the first kill was fun, and some of the gore effects were groovy, but every kill ended up being the same strategy: make noise, hide, wait wait wait wait wait wait KILL! A painful contrast to better stealth games' ability to mix up strategy and objectives to avoid the crushing boredom that the genre can succumb to.

Wiimote plastic-bagging might be cool, though, especially if you have to hold it still while the Wiimote rumbles crazily.

Read it again. The quote is from Nintendo Power. I trust them over IGN.

So you define Grade A strictly by how much money is spent? Go watch waterworld. You are waaaaay off base.

I choose to define grade A by the quality of the game, not the money poured into making it.

Geo: Yes. Some grade-a titles are complete crap. Nevertheless, they look great.

Take your example, waterworld. The plot was ridiculous, and it was a bad movie, no doubt. But boy did it look good. A visually, if not mentally, convincing picture of a water-covered world and it's society.

Ok, so it looks pretty. It still sucks.

If you were a movie company, would you concentrate your efforts on Waterworld 2 or a movie that can recoup its cost opening weekend?

Grade A should stand for quality, not cash. You are the only person I have ever heard put it that way.

I love how people are acting like this is some huge accomplishment for the Wii when,

A. It's not exclusive

B. Manhunt was pile of dog poop.


But i'm sure the Jack Thompsons of the world will have a field day with this "torture simulator". I mean,the big M on the box is just there because they needed space filled on the box art,right?

In general, I prefer big budget games. Big budget games typically sell more copies, so at least I'm not alone. The Waterworld point is moot. You can't just take a single movie or game and apply its lesson to the overall picture. It is called proof by example and is a logical fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_example

When the smoke clears on the Wii, you will find its biggest sellers are big budget Nintendo games like Zelda, not ports and low-budget shtuff. Even the 3rd party stars will be bigger budget exclusives. It is always like that. The same will hold true for PC, 360, PS3, movies, music, cars, etc.

Though it is not always the case, products with the most resources put into their production will usually be viewed as better by the general populace.

Oh yeah, and Manhunt II will probably suck, though it is pretty awesome that it will be on a Nintendo console, what with the killin' and torture and that.

Why does it always seem like the comments on Joystiq are always filled with Sony viral marketers as far as Wii news is concerned?

Manhunt 2 Wii teaser trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNUaVd3kI90

Jake:

The waterworld point is not moot. It is proof that spending a lot of money making something does not guarantee its quality, which is what my point is. Waterworld is one of many examples.

"When the smoke clears on the Wii, you will find its biggest sellers are big budget Nintendo games like Zelda, not ports and low-budget shtuff. Even the 3rd party stars will be bigger budget exclusives. It is always like that. The same will hold true for PC, 360, PS3, movies, music, cars, etc."

Are we talking big sellers, or great games? They are not one in the same, especially when you try to correlate them to movies and music. Im sure there are some games on that list of best sellers you put up that you wouldn't classify as great.

The other point I was making was by default, budgets for PS3/360 games are much higher than their PS2/wii counterparts. A PS2 game that can get all the money and attention it needs, and it will almost certainly still be cheaper than the cost of making a game for PS3. The bigger install base of PS2/Wii helps ensure that that game can still only sell to a small portion of console owners and still turn a profit.

Why did I ever buy a Wii. I already got the PS2 and I surely don't want the PSP. What, is it the last gen outlet mall for games? You got few VC old school releases and now the last gen ports. Doesn't look innovative to me. Wake up people! Buy one of these three: PC, PS3, or a Xbox360. You'll be amazed!

Me and my bro where talking about this in the pub last night; the Wii version would be amazing if they did it right.

Imgain, you have a knife in hand and your told to stab the guy in the stomach 5 times. 5 jabs with your Wii controller and he's dead, like using a real knife! Slash him a bit? why not?

If this is how they are gonna do the game then it will be worth buying the Wii just for this!

People thinking this is some kind of achievement for the Wii just don't get it. The Wii is being placed on the same tier as PS2. That means it's already considered last gen to most 3rd party developers and its games will reflect that. 3rd parties aren't bothering to develop much exclusive content simply because its cheaper to port some PS2 title and strap a few wiimote controls to it. People should be gravely concerned - the PS2 market will die as the PS3 market ramps up. There's going to be a crunch time where the Wii may well find itself in the same hell as the Gamecube - full of Pokemon / Mario / Zelda / titles and precious little else.

Geo,
Not that you'll ever read this, but point well taken. I would argue that resources drastically increase the chance of a game being stellar in the eyes of many and back it up with numbers. I understand your reasoning for the Waterworld example, but you are still taking one instance out of hundreds of big budget movies and drawing a conclusion from it. You are technically correct, but it is a always a bad logical method to make a point. It isn't like people are going to look at Waterworld and consider not spending big bucks on a movie anymore.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What you consider great, others may think is garbage. I usually base greatness on how many people like and buy it. If I like a game that isn't that popular, I just consider that I like it, not that it is truly one of the best. Music is a bad example because it is sooooo subjective, much more than games. With cars, they are all big budget. You can't design a car for $10,000 or something and sell it to the masses, so it is also a terrible example. My appoligies.

And brace yourself for this one. I really liked Waterworld. Honestly. But I will never call it great!!

I'm convinced no matter what games come out for the Wii, there will always be people to bitch about it. Either way it goes if the game is a port or if it's seen as last gen, who really gives a shit as long as you have fun. There's so many people that want the Wii to fail so they'll use any excuse to make it seem as if it doesn't have a chance, same for the PS3 haters. Me personally I won't be getting a PS3 unless it drops to a $250 but at the same time why do you all devote your lives into hating a system? You guys remind me of some insecure people that are questioning your own purchase.

Jake,

It seems to be quite a rare occurrence when people can discuss something on here without slinging poo. Thank you.

I think we have to keep this just to games. Every other subject has too many other facets to directly compare it to games.

That being said, aren't there plenty of big budget games that don't sell well? I don't really know what the budgets are for each game.

And I found waterworld rather enjoyable too. By no means great, but enjoyable.

Liek some of the more sane posters on here, I also thought Manhunt was profoundly boring (though I never played it with the headset, which I hear improves the experience somewhat, making it a mystery why the game never came bundled with it in the first place...). I'm certainly not turning cartwheels over a sequel.

As for the age old and utterly tired 'Nintendo/Kiddy' argument, let me add this; those claiming Nintendo's consoles to be for children always seem to conveniently ignore the fact that the PS2 in particular, as the most popular console of the last gen was owned by more children than the GC ever was.

It's also worth noting that I have friends with young children and they all have PS2s with lots of kiddy games (Disney film licenses and the like), many of which never even made it to the 'Cube. It's a fact that the vast majority of children's games appear in greater number on the most popular console (i.e. PS2), making the assertions about Nintendo somewhat fallacious. But hey, don't let cold, hard facts get in the way of trite and utterly redundant arguments. (Not to mention how immature the whole argument itself really is!).

Also in response to the poster who made the simplistic 'realistic graphics + gore = mature' argument; if such things are indeed the determinants for what makes a title mature, then can you please tell me why it's mostly excitable fourteen year old boys that get excited over gore more than adults? Most people grow out of being excited or impressed by blood and guts by the time they hit their twenties...