Metareview -- Wii Music

by Justin McElroy { Oct 21st 2008 at 7:00PM }

We haven't had a lot of nice things to say about Wii Music, largely because, to this point, it's brought nothing but sadness into our lives. First there was Ravi Drums, then it made us watch Shiggy play the saxafaux, then there was that absolutely bizarre track list. Now, some major review hubs are weighing in on the game(?) and we're just as perplexed as ever.

1UP (A-): "Wii Music may have a hard time winning over the skeptics who just want to laugh at it, but give the game the chance it deserves. You just might realize it's pretty damn fun being in on the joke."
Kombo (50/100): "Initially, there's an element of novelty to Wii Music. Admittedly, it's kind of fun to motion the controller as if you're playing a real instrument -- especially when playing with something like a violin, which simply feels good to play in the game -- but the enjoyment quickly dissipates."
Gamespy (70/100): "Now that we've spent a good deal of time with Wii Music ourselves, we're confident in saying the following: If you have young children, buy this game and enjoy it with them. ... However, it's very safe to say that gamers who prefer the likes of Rock Band, first-person shooters and Solid Snake's espionage antics will not care about Wii Music in the slightest."
GamePro (70/100): "Playing almost any instrument in the game requires a bit more practice than say, swinging a bat bowling a ball in Wii Sports, which mires the game in a muddy territory between pick-up-and-play casual and memorizing and practicing hardcore. When you're able to successfully balance the two and create wonderful music, Wii Music can provide an experience you've never felt before. Not in a music game, not in any other Wii game."

Tags: metareview, nintendo, wii-music

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)

Blazur @ Oct 21st 2008 2:59PM

I've been doing wrist pumping exercises to get my arms in shape for what is sure to be the next revolution in music gaming.

Haggard @ Oct 21st 2008 7:09PM

Those porn subscriptions are about to pay off.

Haggard @ Oct 21st 2008 7:09PM

I think if anything this demonstrates how skewed review scores are these days.

"You probably won't enjoy it" = 7/10?

halcy0n @ Oct 21st 2008 7:40PM

You pay?

Mr Khan @ Oct 21st 2008 7:47PM

Heh. Nintendo would be the last company to start paying for good reviews. Sports, Fit, Play, Music. All mediocre reviews, all excellent sales

It doesn't impact them.

Platy @ Oct 21st 2008 7:51PM

The game not being target expecificaly to you does not means it is a bad game =P

BananaBoat @ Oct 21st 2008 7:56PM

7/10 is the lowest some places are willing to go.

That said, places that actually use the entire 0-100 scale (or F to A+, since the switch) such as 1up, let Jennifer Tsao, the only person on the 1up staff who wouldn't have given the game a 5/10, review the game to avoid pissing off Nintendo fanboys. The result is an A- for a game that noone over the age of 5 is going to buy. Well, let me amend that, noone reading a review on 1up.com that is over 5 will buy. Millions of soccer moms will buy it, I'm sure.

It should be 3 reviewers on every game, or 1 on all of them. The result of having 1 reviewer on a game, is that the score goes to Metacritic the same as if 3 people had reviewed it. It also leaves the door open for BS statements like "You let her review it because you knew she'd give it a good score!" which are somewhat unfair, but that just got stated nonetheless.

Don't mind me. Anger left over from the E3 debacle.

Haggard @ Oct 21st 2008 8:01PM

No, but the fact that it's not targeted at me doesn't redeem it.

AK @ Oct 21st 2008 8:06PM

"The game not being target expecificaly to you does not means it is a bad game =P"

So what are you are saying is that only the target audience is allowed to judge whether or not a game is good?

Also, using "expecificaly" in a sentence does not mean it is a real word =P

time @ Oct 21st 2008 8:11PM

Those reviews are saying that for what the game tries to be, it is a 7/10.

The reviews that are more negative, like IGN's, are comparing what the game is to what they want the game to be.

Both are valid, you just have to view them in different ways.

Megadanxzero @ Oct 21st 2008 8:14PM

It's not so much that it doesn't appeal to him, or you, or me, it's that it doesn't appeal to GAMERS IN GENERAL. The worst thing is, Nintendo acts like it does, and acts like we're just constantly moaning when we complain about them bringing out shitty non-game after shitty non-game.

Here's a hint: If Nintendo made some actual GAMES, maybe we wouldn't moan? Where's my Starfox, Zelda and F-Zero bitches. Send Starfox and F-Zero off to Namco and SEGA again if you have to, I don't care, just get it done...

HeyTone @ Oct 21st 2008 9:33PM

Here's another interesting stat: 98% of the people who will buy this game don't read video game reviews- Johnny SonofaBitch begs mom in Walmart to get him a new game, and, oh, this looks neat! Sold. Next.

zuburi @ Oct 21st 2008 9:40PM

This is why game magazines shouldn't be reviewing toys. Parent's Choice would be a good place to start for reviews.

Markusdragon @ Oct 22nd 2008 1:34AM

'expecificaly' is a perfectly cromulent word.

Johnny SonofaBitch @ Oct 22nd 2008 1:19PM

I didnt beg her, asshole. She wanted it too.

Envoy @ Oct 21st 2008 7:15PM

My '08 GoTY

Hyams @ Oct 21st 2008 7:21PM

Srsly?

giantenemycrab @ Oct 21st 2008 7:28PM

may I ask why? It looks totally unappealing to me. What am I missing?

&rew @ Oct 21st 2008 7:52PM

Wii Music GOTY '08? No.
Mario Music GOTY '08? Fuck yes!

Also its sad that many of you don't understand sarcasm.

Monkeys Suck @ Oct 21st 2008 7:57PM

Dude Ode to Joy and Carmen!!!

vidGuy @ Oct 21st 2008 8:14PM

Hahaha, I guess everyone's sarcasm sensors were out of batteries, behind the door, and in a million little pieces.

Envoy @ Oct 21st 2008 11:43PM

I guess sarcasm doesn't exist. I was just kidding guys/girls! My GoTY for sure is WiiFit!

Slaziman @ Oct 22nd 2008 1:46AM

Wii Fit? But that game sucks too!

...wait a minute....

I'm on to your fancy shmancy sarcasm this time!

vidGuy @ Oct 21st 2008 7:17PM

This is a game for the casual crowd who cannot enjoy Guitar Hero or Rock Band because those games are too difficult. I think that means its target audience is about 7 people.

warioswoods2 @ Oct 21st 2008 7:25PM

That is complete nonsense - it does, in fact, require skill in order to create music that actually sounds good. It's true that it is not score based, but that's its great advantage - where Rock Band & similar rhythm games only measured your ability to dumbly follow along with a score, Wii Music puts your ability to actually arrange music to the test.

Look here: http://digg.com/nintendo/Wii_Music_Zelda_Theme_Remixes

And you will be able to see clever re-arrangements of the Zelda theme in Wii Music, and, alongside these, Matt from IGN's complete butchering of the same song with the same combination of instruments.

View that, then come back and tell me it doesn't require skill. It does, but not the kind that other rhythm games measure - and Matt's complete and utter failure to play the game well only underscores this and negates the credibility of his 50-review.

Mr Khan @ Oct 21st 2008 7:26PM

You're looking at it wrong if that's what you're thinking. It's not a "too retarded for a real music game" substitute. Those games are about trying to replicate someone else's music as closely as you can, this is about re-interpreting it

Killjebus @ Oct 21st 2008 7:32PM

"View that, then come back and tell me it doesn't require skill."

I am pretty good at picking my nose, but I wouldn't call it a skill.

aristokrat @ Oct 21st 2008 7:51PM

Wow, this takes me back to middle school band. Nothing like getting to play boring background percussion instruments. Playing the jingle bells looks absolutely enthralling!

(For those percussionists out there, you can't lie that the "effects" instruments sucks a lot of the time. I'd love to play some bells, though without the skill and feel of holding tiny hammers, it'd probably suck too.)

Roto13 @ Oct 21st 2008 7:53PM

"This is a game for the casual crowd who cannot enjoy Guitar Hero or Rock Band because those games are too difficult. I think that means its target audience is about 7 people."

Maybe it's targeted at those people who were bitching and moaning that you can actually fail at Guitar Hero IV a couple of months back.

aristokrat @ Oct 21st 2008 7:56PM

And wow, the only difference between the "good" version and the "bad" version was that IGN's version had stupid Mario Paint sound effects going rather than real instruments. The song still seemed to play itself. I guess getting it involves enjoying tasks that require no skill and complete themselves perfectly no matter what preparation you put into it (chose real or fake instruments, it'll still happen). If that was good vs. bad, then this game has all the depth of an RPG wherein you merely name you character, watch a video of him beating the final (and only) boss, and then get to revel in the flashing of the "You Win!" screen. Want to see another video? Rinse and repeat. Caloo, calay...

warioswoods2 @ Oct 21st 2008 8:02PM

aristokrat:

Looks like you watched the wrong video, genius. The poorly played IGN video was third, not second. The second video was a response to IGN's debacle, but played extremely well. And you can't back out of this - your response makes it clear that you thought the dispute was between a good video with normal instruments and a bad video with animals/etc, while it is in fact a dispute between two playthroughs with the exact same lineup of odd "Mario Paint" style instruments. Watch again, if you have the attention span.

Vidikron @ Oct 22nd 2008 12:20AM

"and Matt's complete and utter failure to play the game well only underscores this and negates the credibility of his 50-review."

Please tell me you're kidding, right? Matt's a big Nintendo fanboy. He loves to hand out high scores for Nintendo platforms. The fact he rated a flagship game that low says a lot about the quality of the "game".

samfish @ Oct 22nd 2008 1:02AM

Not really, Vid. Matt's had it out something fierce for Wii Music ever since E3. I mean, the guy has been saying for months that he's going to give it a low score.
He never gave it a chance. Personally, I don't think he should have been allowed to review it. He obviously made up his mind before he even received a copy from Nintendo for review...and I think his awful demonstration videos compared to other ones are proof enough of that.

Personally, I really like the idea behind Wii Music...but, though having not played it, I feel like Nintendo limited the scope of the game WAY more than they should have. They could have gone so much further with the concept, but they didn't. A Mario Paint-style editor would have completely redeemed any faults I might have with the game, though. Such a shame!

Vidikron @ Oct 22nd 2008 1:54AM

So are you actually going to try it?

bobartig @ Oct 22nd 2008 2:02AM

I'm not entirely sure that Wii Music even fits my definition of a game. There's not really a clear risk/reward structure to the game, not really any sense of failure, simply varying levels of success. There aren't really predefined rules for doing better or worse. So, this doesn't really occur to me as much more of a game than an electronic keyboard with animations.

Questworld @ Oct 22nd 2008 2:27AM

"Please tell me you're kidding, right? Matt's a big Nintendo fanboy. He loves to hand out high scores for Nintendo platforms. The fact he rated a flagship game that low says a lot about the quality of the 'game'".

Just because it's assumed that a person is a "Nintendo fanboy," it doesn't mean that by default they love every game from Nintendo. People just like to mock people like that by defining them as "blind." I mean I love Nintendo in general but that doesn't mean I love Mario Kart or Metroid. Not everyone "gets" a game, no matter who made it. I mean how many times have we gone through "hardcore" gamers who swear up and down how great so and so game will be but then get disappointed. Do we hear uninterested parties calling those people "retarded" and "blind fanboys" because the former "called it" on how questionable so and so game was and that the latter just got carried off the hype, graphics, and their favorite company brand?

People should just let each other be in choosing what game they want and stop trying to "campaign" their opinions as gospel because, frankly, I don't think any of us are genius to point out good taste or good games.

Roto13 @ Oct 22nd 2008 2:54AM

"I'm not entirely sure that Wii Music even fits my definition of a game. There's not really a clear risk/reward structure to the game, not really any sense of failure, simply varying levels of success. There aren't really predefined rules for doing better or worse."

It's apparent that you haven't played it. There are games in Wii Music.

Blazur @ Oct 22nd 2008 8:31AM

I beg to differ. This is a game for the retarded crowd that have difficulty tying their shoes.

samfish @ Oct 22nd 2008 9:02AM

"So are you actually going to try it?"

Yup. Probably sometime next week. It's next up in my GameFly Q.

aristokrat @ Oct 22nd 2008 4:05PM

Fair enough, but the third video wasn't much worse. It's that as bad as it gets, it's still pretty lame. It still played itself. Compare that to someone failing at a guitar hero song, oh wait, you wouldn't see much more than a couple of seconds, followed by that horrible string-crunching noise, and then boos and "You Failed" on the screen. But I guess the mediocrity-loving crowd thinks that too confrontational or something.

PSN: johnnynumber5 @ Oct 21st 2008 7:17PM

sounds like there is more substance than it seemed after E3. Maybe a rhythm game for the kids.

Mr Khan @ Oct 21st 2008 7:32PM

It is a rhythm game for the kids in part, but you can get a good bit of depth out of it if you wish

Not $50 worth of depth, though, that's for sure

PSN: johnnynumber5 @ Oct 21st 2008 7:59PM

You know I thought it would be more like Wii Fit (exercise/lifestyle software more than a game) but from the reviews it sounds like it has at least some level of difficulty.

On the surface It feels like more of a technical demo or a pre-cursor to a follow up that will be a more complete version. I might pick it up so the kids can enjoy a music game thats not to hard for them. $50.00 is a steep price to pay. I akin this more to what Wii Sports was. Something that should be thrown in for free in holiday Wii bundles as opposed to a full featured release. I might pay $20.00 for it but it doesn't look to have any staying power.

How you liking that Wario Shake It? Said it before and I will say it again ... Best Wii game to date ... Bit on the short side but an amazing experience.

Mr Khan @ Oct 21st 2008 9:01PM

It really didn't beat the "wow" factor of Galaxy or Brawl, imo, but it was good old-fashioned platforming fun, with everything intact

The music i especially liked. Perfectly catchy

PSN: johnnynumber5 @ Oct 21st 2008 9:38PM

I was way more blown away by Shake It than Galaxy

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Oct 21st 2008 9:47PM

@Johnny.

Really? I was thinking of giving Wario a rent. Is it really better than galaxy?

TFoK (Naked Peach Defense Force) @ Oct 21st 2008 10:36PM

"Is it really better than galaxy?"

Not in a million years. They're very much the same, in that they impress on the same fronts - visuals, level design, etc. But Galaxy does each a billion times better - the game still has the best visuals on the Wii (Shake It looks amazing too, but it gets rudimentary at times, with it's only saving grace being the awesome animations), some of the best music in gaming (Shake It has some pretty awful tunes in comparison), yadda yadda, blah blah blah.

Yeah, it's all opinion, but still, I think it's kinda crazy to be blown away by Shake It and not be impressed by Galaxy.

If this is a double comment I'll kick Joystiq's ass in the face.

PSN: johnnynumber5 @ Oct 21st 2008 11:56PM

@Vegeta

It's really a matter of taste and preference. I certainly enjoyed Mario Galaxy and it was a revolutionary game. For my cup of tea Wario Shake It beats it in every single way possible. From the gameplay, the graphics and the hand drawn animated scenes that function as a way to tell the story it did more for me than Galaxy ever did.

I say its hands down better than Galaxy. Galaxy was much bigger and scope and had more of a magical feel and aura. I just think the execution and game play goodness of Shake It was the best the Wii has seen yet.

If we keep getting games that have this big of an original take on 2-D platforming and games in general the Wii will start exceeding the hype.

The game is just as good as it gets on the Wii - For me anyway.