Archive for the ‘High Voltage Software’ Category

FPS Friday! Conduit 2 has been played how much? Official U.S. Nintendo Channel data report.

May 4, 2013


Coffee Beans
I never did play Conduit 2. If you missed my wall-of-text April Brewed post earlier today, you can see what games I played during April, HERE. If you already read the list, you may have noticed that I didn’t play a FPS during the month. It was the first month this year that I had not played a FPS, but I did get a good bit of gaming done.

Conduit 2 released as an exclusive Wii FPS just over 2 years ago now, on April 19, 2011. The game received an ESRB rating of “TEEN” with “Animated Blood, Language, Mild Suggestive Themes, Violence” listed as content for parents and gamers to be aware of. It was the sequel to the other exclusive Wii FPS The Conduit, which released in 2009.

While there really hasn’t been a hint of the Wii U getting Conduit 3 yet, did U.S. Wii owners enjoy Conduit 2? How many hours have U.S. Wii owners reported playing Conduit 2, since it released just over 2 years ago, and how do its averaged hours “Per person” compare to some other Wii FPS games? Brew yourself some coffee, and let’s take a look!

How many hours have you played?

The Brew
Conduit 2 now has approximately 13,736 U.S. Wii owners with data reported through the Nintendo Channel, which is more than double the number that had data reported about 5 months after it released. The 431,734 Total Hours of game-play now reported (seen in the image above), is an increase of just over 380,000 Total Hours from the game’s initial data that was reported almost 2 years ago.

Its reported average play time of 31 Hours 25 Minutes “Per person”, averages out to just over 2 hours for every time the game has been reported played. This simply means that U.S. Wii owners have played the game about 2 Hours 4 Minutes each time they sit down to play it, at least according to the reported data.

Now, has Conduit 2 been played more than GoldenEye 007 and Metroid Prime 3, as the image asks? As for the “Total Hours” reported, Conduit 2 is below both of those games, but in the average hours “Per person” section it’s a different story.

Conduit 2 is now “neck and neck” with GoldenEye 007‘s average “Per person”, being lower than it by just 3 minutes. Compared to Metroid Prime 3’s average “Per person” though, Conduit 2 is almost 10 hours higher. This means that U.S. Wii owners that bought and played Conduit 2, apparently had more play time from the game than U.S. Wii owners of Metroid Prime 3. The hours “Per person” would be a reflection of the all important “replay value”, that is often talked about for games. So, we can say Conduit 2 offered more replay value for its average player than Metroid Prime 3, but about the same replay value as GoldenEye 007, at least according to the official Nintendo Channel data.

What about review scores? The game currently has a “professional” review score average of 66.34%, based on 41 reviews for the game on GameRankings.com. What about customers that purchased the game though? Conduit 2 has a customer review score average of 89.41%, based on 17 “Amazon Verified Purchase” customer reviews.

If you’re interested in reading an actual review, I suggest you read a review by Jeremy, of NintendoFuse.com, that he wrote for the game, HERE. He provided the number of hours he had spent in the game’s single player and multiplayer before writing his review, which I appreciate seeing in reviews. Soon after Conduit 2 released, a controversy surrounding the game arose after one “professional” review of the game was published. If you missed what happened with the issue, you can read about it, HERE.

Caffeinated Thoughts
If you never saw any footage from Conduit 2, the trailer below will give you an idea of what weapons you can expect to be battling with in the game:

I think Conduit 2 having a higher average “Per person” than Metroid Prime 3, is a good example of why many companies focus on multiplayer aspects in games. Am I more likely to recommend a friend go out and buy a great single-player (only) focused game for $50 or $60, or am I more likely to recommend a game with online multiplayer and a single-player campaign (even if short), that I find myself playing on a more regular basis? Probably the latter.

Knowing how High Voltage tried to step up and support the Wii with a game genre that was/is popular, but not published very often on the Wii (compared to the other consoles at the time), I’m wondering if HVS will perhaps try to continue that for the Wii U? I wonder if they might release Conduit 3 for the Wii U, or perhaps even find a publisher to get behind The Grinder for the Wii U?

After the original The Conduit game, it really seemed like High Voltage Software was going to be able to try new things on the Wii, such as their once “Mature” themed Gladiator A.D. game, but something happened with their publisher relations. They made drastic changes to what they had originally shown for Gladiator A.D., instead releasing the more colorful “TEEN” rated Tournament of Legends, and another High Voltage FPS game in development, The Grinder, vanished from the Wii radar altogether. I know some seem to be thinking Nintendo is having third party struggles (still) with the Wii U, so I hope that Nintendo of America might be more open to publishing games such as what Gladiator A.D. once was, and even The Grinder.

Questions
If you own a copy of Conduit 2, do you know if the online community is still decent enough to hop online and get into a match quickly? If you played both games from the series, which one did you enjoy more?

If you were a fan of The Conduit and Conduit 2, do you hope that High Voltage Software perhaps makes a Conduit 3 sequel for the Wii U? Or, would you prefer them to instead release their once shown Wii FPS game that disappeared, The Grinder, for the Wii U first?

If you’re interested in Conduit 2, it can now be found used for under $20 at GameStop and on Amazon.com (even new on Amazon from some sellers). You can also see both games from the series on Amazon below:

Advertisements

Gladiator A.D. vs. Tournament of Legends Screenshot Comparisons

February 20, 2010

On May 25, 2009, High-Voltage Software announced they were working on Gladiator A.D., a game exclusively for the Wii.

On February 3, 2010, it was announced that Gladiator A.D. wasn’t the same anymore, it is now Tournament of Legends.  I wasn’t initially sure if Tournament of Legends was the same as Gladiator A.D., because of the character models and there was more color in the screenshots.  It has been confirmed though, Gladiator A.D. has been changed to Tournament of Legends.

High Voltage Software and Sega still haven’t released any video footage of Tournament of Legends, but I noticed a few things about Tournament of Legends from the few screenshots they have released.

It appears they are using some of the same levels from Gladiator A.D. in Tournament of Legends.  The level names below are how they appeared in Gladiator A.D.  I’m listing some differences I’ve noticed between each games’ levels, and including the screenshots as well.
      1) Grand Colosseum:
           a) It now looks like the fighters will fight surrounded by a pit of some sort.  I can’t tell if the pit opens and closes as an interactive part of the arena or not.  Previously, in Gladiator A.D. pictures and videos, the only “pits” were what looked like pits where lions would possibly come from.
           b) Also in Tournament of Legends’ photos, it looks like there are arrows in the ground and what I think appears to be some sort of tentacles randomly around the level.
           c) The flags around the Colosseum in ToL are noticeably more colorful than they were in Gladiator A.D.  Tournament of Legends is a more colorful game in general now.
           d) The spiked columns around the Colosseum in Tournament of Legends appear to have some sort of a fire/flame coming off the top of them, whereas in Gladiator A.D., I didn’t spot that effect.  The spiked columns in ToL also appear to have a lime-green neon glow on them in certain areas, this was not present on the spiked columns in Gladiator A.D.
           e) Tournament of Legends is lacking crowds in the Colosseum, whereas Gladiator A.D. had crowds of people scattered around the Colosseum cheering/booing depending on what was happening.
           f) The arena floor in ToL looks like it’s had some astrological symbols added to it(I don’t know anything about this stuff, it could just be random symbols!)
      2) Gardens:
           a) Tournament of Legends’ level takes place at night, Gladiator A.D.’s level took place at dusk.
           b) Gladiator A.D.’s level had water in the middle arena area, and the fighters were standing in the water the entire fight.  In the Tournament of Legends picture, it doesn’t look like the fighters will be fighting while standing in the water.  The middle arena in Tournament of Legends does appear as it’s been raised slightly.  I’m wondering if the environments are more interactive in Tournament of Legends and perhaps there’s a switch or something to cause the water to rise during the middle of the fight?
           c) The plants and vines around the Gardens’ arena are noticeably greener in ToL, and the water is noticeably more blue in ToL.  ToL retained the cascading water streams on the outside of the arena that Gladiator A.D. had originally, which I like.
           d) Same as the Grand Colosseum, ToL’s level for the Gardens doesn’t have any audience/crowd standing around the arena watching the fight.

Here are some screenshots from both versions the game.  Click the images below to enlarge them for seeing the details better!  Descriptions of the images are beneath each them:

In these pictures above, the level shown was known as the Grand Colosseum in Gladiator A.D.  You can see the Gladiator A.D. image on the left, and Tournament of Legends on the right.  If you click the image to enlarge it, you can notice the fire(?) effect on the top of the spiked columns in the Tournament of Legends photo(photo on right).  If you look at the decorative banner, near the top right corner of Gladiator A.D.’s picture, then look at in the Tournament of Legends picture, you will notice more color and the symbol has changed on it from Gladiator A.D. to Tournament of Legends.

In this image, the level shown was known as the Gardens in Gladiator A.D., I’m not sure if the level name has changed for Tournament of Legends.  In the Gladiator A.D. image on the far left, you can see what appears to be the sun setting(rising?) in the level.  In the Tournament of Legends image on the right, you can notice the moon(?) in the background and also how the plants on the pedestals are greener than they appear in the older Gladiator A.D. images on the left.  Also, the crowd is lacking from the Tournament of Legends image, but present in the Gladiator A.D. images.

In these images, look at the spiked columns in Gladiator A.D., then look at the spiked columns in Tournament of Legends.  The spiked columns in Tournament of Legends appear as though they have sort of neon lime-green lighting on them?  Also, these images show how the HUD(head-up display) differs from the version then and now.  In Gladiator A.D., all the meters were at the top.  Now in Tournament of Legends, there is a meter at the bottom of the screen.  I wonder if the HUD will be customizable in the game, like it was in The Conduit.

Thoughts:
I was really impressed with what I saw coming from Gladiator A.D. and what it seemed that High Voltage was trying to achieve with it.  
I’m not as impressed with what I’ve seen from Tournament of Legends(although it’s only been screenshots).
A few things I was impressed about in Gladiator A.D., that I wish Tournament of Legends kept:
1)  Crowds:
I liked how HVS was trying to allow the player to win favor with the crowds in Gladiator A.D., and after winning the crowds favor, the player could, “…challenge the champions for fame, wealth, and in some cases, freedom…”.
2)  Wii MotionPlus(WM+):
Eric Nofsinger(HVS) told Matt Casamassina of IGN.com, “The Wii MotionPlus will be used to add variance to the attacks to break up what could possibly be seen as mechanical attacks.  For example, depending on the orientation of the player’s wrist when a left slice is initiated, the gladiator will attack his opponents right side from one of three angles, making it slightly more difficult to perfect block…”.  I thought this would make Gladiator A.D. a very strategic fighting game when WM+ was used, and I thought that would help set it apart.  It’s been confirmed that Tournament of Legends will not use WM+.
Questions:
If you’ve known about Tournament of Legends, when it was known as Gladiator A.D., what do you think of the changes to the game?  Are you more excited about Tournament of Legends new style, or did you prefer the style of Gladiator A.D.?  Is there anything you wish Tournament of Legends had kept from the original version of Gladiator A.D.?
Tournament of Legends is releasing on the Wii on May 18, 2010, do you plan on buying the game from what you’ve seen of it, and what you know about it?
I’d love to know what you think, good or bad!
Also, I’m debating on using a “Jump Break” for some posts, this was one of them.  Do you prefer the posts to appear entirely on the main page, like they have been, or would you prefer a “Jump Break” for the longer posts?

Gladiator A.D. vs. Tournament of Legends Screenshot Comparisons

February 20, 2010

On May 25, 2009, High-Voltage Software announced they were working on Gladiator A.D., a game exclusively for the Wii.

On February 3, 2010, it was announced that Gladiator A.D. wasn’t the same anymore, it is now Tournament of Legends.  I wasn’t initially sure if Tournament of Legends was the same as Gladiator A.D., because of the character models and there was more color in the screenshots.  It has been confirmed though, Gladiator A.D. has been changed to Tournament of Legends.

High Voltage Software and Sega still haven’t released any video footage of Tournament of Legends, but I noticed a few things about Tournament of Legends from the few screenshots they have released.

It appears they are using some of the same levels from Gladiator A.D. in Tournament of Legends.  The level names below are how they appeared in Gladiator A.D.  I’m listing some differences I’ve noticed between each games’ levels, and including the screenshots as well.
      1) Grand Colosseum:
           a) It now looks like the fighters will fight surrounded by a pit of some sort.  I can’t tell if the pit opens and closes as an interactive part of the arena or not.  Previously, in Gladiator A.D. pictures and videos, the only “pits” were what looked like pits where lions would possibly come from.
           b) Also in Tournament of Legends’ photos, it looks like there are arrows in the ground and what I think appears to be some sort of tentacles randomly around the level.
           c) The flags around the Colosseum in ToL are noticeably more colorful than they were in Gladiator A.D.  Tournament of Legends is a more colorful game in general now.
           d) The spiked columns around the Colosseum in Tournament of Legends appear to have some sort of a fire/flame coming off the top of them, whereas in Gladiator A.D., I didn’t spot that effect.  The spiked columns in ToL also appear to have a lime-green neon glow on them in certain areas, this was not present on the spiked columns in Gladiator A.D.
           e) Tournament of Legends is lacking crowds in the Colosseum, whereas Gladiator A.D. had crowds of people scattered around the Colosseum cheering/booing depending on what was happening.
           f) The arena floor in ToL looks like it’s had some astrological symbols added to it(I don’t know anything about this stuff, it could just be random symbols!)
      2) Gardens:
           a) Tournament of Legends’ level takes place at night, Gladiator A.D.’s level took place at dusk.
           b) Gladiator A.D.’s level had water in the middle arena area, and the fighters were standing in the water the entire fight.  In the Tournament of Legends picture, it doesn’t look like the fighters will be fighting while standing in the water.  The middle arena in Tournament of Legends does appear as it’s been raised slightly.  I’m wondering if the environments are more interactive in Tournament of Legends and perhaps there’s a switch or something to cause the water to rise during the middle of the fight?
           c) The plants and vines around the Gardens’ arena are noticeably greener in ToL, and the water is noticeably more blue in ToL.  ToL retained the cascading water streams on the outside of the arena that Gladiator A.D. had originally, which I like.
           d) Same as the Grand Colosseum, ToL’s level for the Gardens doesn’t have any audience/crowd standing around the arena watching the fight.

Here are some screenshots from both versions the game.  Click the images below to enlarge them for seeing the details better!  Descriptions of the images are beneath each them:

In these pictures above, the level shown was known as the Grand Colosseum in Gladiator A.D.  You can see the Gladiator A.D. image on the left, and Tournament of Legends on the right.  If you click the image to enlarge it, you can notice the fire(?) effect on the top of the spiked columns in the Tournament of Legends photo(photo on right).  If you look at the decorative banner, near the top right corner of Gladiator A.D.’s picture, then look at in the Tournament of Legends picture, you will notice more color and the symbol has changed on it from Gladiator A.D. to Tournament of Legends.

In this image, the level shown was known as the Gardens in Gladiator A.D., I’m not sure if the level name has changed for Tournament of Legends.  In the Gladiator A.D. image on the far left, you can see what appears to be the sun setting(rising?) in the level.  In the Tournament of Legends image on the right, you can notice the moon(?) in the background and also how the plants on the pedestals are greener than they appear in the older Gladiator A.D. images on the left.  Also, the crowd is lacking from the Tournament of Legends image, but present in the Gladiator A.D. images.

In these images, look at the spiked columns in Gladiator A.D., then look at the spiked columns in Tournament of Legends.  The spiked columns in Tournament of Legends appear as though they have sort of neon lime-green lighting on them?  Also, these images show how the HUD(head-up display) differs from the version then and now.  In Gladiator A.D., all the meters were at the top.  Now in Tournament of Legends, there is a meter at the bottom of the screen.  I wonder if the HUD will be customizable in the game, like it was in The Conduit.

Thoughts:
I was really impressed with what I saw coming from Gladiator A.D. and what it seemed that High Voltage was trying to achieve with it.  
I’m not as impressed with what I’ve seen from Tournament of Legends(although it’s only been screenshots).
A few things I was impressed about in Gladiator A.D., that I wish Tournament of Legends kept:
1)  Crowds:
I liked how HVS was trying to allow the player to win favor with the crowds in Gladiator A.D., and after winning the crowds favor, the player could, “…challenge the champions for fame, wealth, and in some cases, freedom…”.
2)  Wii MotionPlus(WM+):
Eric Nofsinger(HVS) told Matt Casamassina of IGN.com, “The Wii MotionPlus will be used to add variance to the attacks to break up what could possibly be seen as mechanical attacks.  For example, depending on the orientation of the player’s wrist when a left slice is initiated, the gladiator will attack his opponents right side from one of three angles, making it slightly more difficult to perfect block…”.  I thought this would make Gladiator A.D. a very strategic fighting game when WM+ was used, and I thought that would help set it apart.  It’s been confirmed that Tournament of Legends will not use WM+.
Questions:
If you’ve known about Tournament of Legends, when it was known as Gladiator A.D., what do you think of the changes to the game?  Are you more excited about Tournament of Legends new style, or did you prefer the style of Gladiator A.D.?  Is there anything you wish Tournament of Legends had kept from the original version of Gladiator A.D.?
Tournament of Legends is releasing on the Wii on May 18, 2010, do you plan on buying the game from what you’ve seen of it, and what you know about it?
I’d love to know what you think, good or bad!
Also, I’m debating on using a “Jump Break” for some posts, this was one of them.  Do you prefer the posts to appear entirely on the main page, like they have been, or would you prefer a “Jump Break” for the longer posts?

>An Open Letter to Adam Biessener of GameInformer

August 31, 2009

>Hey Adam,
In issue 196 you reviewed The Conduit, and I’ve been wondering about your review.
Did you actually finish playing the single player campaign?

You said at one point in the review, “…but drawing a bead on a human opponent is tough even with the game’s ploddingly slow movement speed.”, and “Aiming is mediocre without being heinous.”
You didn’t mention though, that you can adjust your turning speed, running speed, the bounding box, etc., in the control settings in the game.

The level of customization for controls in The Conduit hasn’t been matched by any previous FPS game on the Wii or other consoles for that matter.
I honestly don’t know how you failed to mention or if you even tried for yourself to adjust the turning speed and running speed in The Conduit.

I played The Conduit’s single player and multiplayer for about a week and a half after I bought the game(still playing the multiplayer some), I went back to KillZone 2, and thought something was wrong with my PS3 controller because of how slow I moved in the game compared to The Conduit.

Also, why doesn’t your review or Ben’s “Second Opinion” mention anything about the achievements in the game?
I understand that achievements are standard on the Xbox360 and even PS3 now, but the fact that a 3rd party on the Wii actually took time of their own, with no obligation to Nintendo, to add achievements in the game, should have been mentioned, as it adds replay value to the single player campaign.

If you didn’t finish the single player campaign, the readers should know that you didn’t finish it.

The game definitely isn’t perfect, the online has glitches and bugs, but that wasn’t mentioned in the review either.
I’m really confused with the reviewing process these days…if you don’t play a game at length and don’t actually finish the single player campaign, why even review it?

Thanks,

Scott
For my readers and for those of you that have played The Conduit and aren’t sure if my points are valid, I encourage you first, read Adam’s review of The Conduit, http://gameinformer.com/NR/exeres/0299E3BA-18FB-4EC8-B884-E3C7742585A8.htm?CS_pid=230518.
If you think that the review is fine, let me know.
If you’ve played The Conduit and think my points are legitimate, maybe you will let Adam know. You can email Adam Biessener at ADAM@GAMEINFORMER.COM.
If you email Adam, please be civil in your emails.
I think we as subscribers to magazines like Game Informer and readers of gaming websites, should expect full, honest reviews of games, especially if the person is getting paid to review the game and it’s their job. I don’t think The Conduit received very many FULL, HONEST reviews when it was released.
What do you think?

An Open Letter to Adam Biessener of GameInformer

August 31, 2009

Hey Adam,
In issue 196 you reviewed The Conduit, and I’ve been wondering about your review.
Did you actually finish playing the single player campaign?

You said at one point in the review, “…but drawing a bead on a human opponent is tough even with the game’s ploddingly slow movement speed.”, and “Aiming is mediocre without being heinous.”
You didn’t mention though, that you can adjust your turning speed, running speed, the bounding box, etc., in the control settings in the game.

The level of customization for controls in The Conduit hasn’t been matched by any previous FPS game on the Wii or other consoles for that matter.
I honestly don’t know how you failed to mention or if you even tried for yourself to adjust the turning speed and running speed in The Conduit.

I played The Conduit’s single player and multiplayer for about a week and a half after I bought the game(still playing the multiplayer some), I went back to KillZone 2, and thought something was wrong with my PS3 controller because of how slow I moved in the game compared to The Conduit.

Also, why doesn’t your review or Ben’s “Second Opinion” mention anything about the achievements in the game?
I understand that achievements are standard on the Xbox360 and even PS3 now, but the fact that a 3rd party on the Wii actually took time of their own, with no obligation to Nintendo, to add achievements in the game, should have been mentioned, as it adds replay value to the single player campaign.

If you didn’t finish the single player campaign, the readers should know that you didn’t finish it.

The game definitely isn’t perfect, the online has glitches and bugs, but that wasn’t mentioned in the review either.
I’m really confused with the reviewing process these days…if you don’t play a game at length and don’t actually finish the single player campaign, why even review it?

Thanks,

Scott
For my readers and for those of you that have played The Conduit and aren’t sure if my points are valid, I encourage you first, read Adam’s review of The Conduit, http://gameinformer.com/NR/exeres/0299E3BA-18FB-4EC8-B884-E3C7742585A8.htm?CS_pid=230518.
If you think that the review is fine, let me know.
If you’ve played The Conduit and think my points are legitimate, maybe you will let Adam know. You can email Adam Biessener at ADAM@GAMEINFORMER.COM.
If you email Adam, please be civil in your emails.
I think we as subscribers to magazines like Game Informer and readers of gaming websites, should expect full, honest reviews of games, especially if the person is getting paid to review the game and it’s their job. I don’t think The Conduit received very many FULL, HONEST reviews when it was released.
What do you think?