Current PC games are much easier to put on consoles, as the gap between PC's and Consoles has closed dramatically over the years , the point where the PS3 and Xbox 360 are only really noticeably different from PC's is because of their lack of Keyboard and Mouse, but instead of trying to replicate an on-lap version of a PC, companies like Xbox, Sony and Microsoft have spent millions in developing better controls and game pads to make the experience of sitting in front of a TV playing a FPS as enjoyable as on a PC. This is evident when you look at the games that occupy both the PC and Current gen consoles; Half Life, Halo, Left 4 Dead, Operation Flash Point, Battlefield, Rainbow 6 etc.

However, when games make their way from PC/Xbox 360/PS3 onto the Wii, then it becomes much harder to analyse how well it will be because the end product is almost always different to the franchise it’s coming from.

When the developers do decide to transfer a franchise over, there seems to be three main ways that PC /Xbox 360/ PS3 games make their way onto the Wii; either by keeping the core experience but from a new perspective (Dead space, Resident Evil Chronicles) or creating an entirely new experience using the same franchise name (Anno 1404, Sims, Spore) or an almost direct port (Sim city, Overlord).

How a game makes its way onto the Wii from other systems is usually one of the key reasons for its success of failure, but more importantly is how well the changes are implemented.

The Wii as a system is a great opportunity for developers to make some truly innovative games and at the same time utilise the large fan base and reap great financial rewards. The downfall of most developers though comes from the choices they make in how the game is going to play on the Wii. There is one perspective and gameplay mechanic that fits on the Wii like a virtual glove; on rails shooters. Just looking at the current library of Wii games you can see more than a few great on rails shooters, from Resident Evil, Ghost Squad and House of the Dead, to the upcoming Dead Space. These are games that choose to stick within this genre and they do so well because they incorporate the Wii controller into the game in a way that would otherwise lose its appeal on any other system. Although they aren’t the most innovative games on the system, what they lack in originality they more than make up for with great gameplay and fun overall experience.

Another type are the game ports that are different from the games they are coming from, but are very similar apart from the story elements. Overlord is a perfect example, where they story is different but the core gameplay remains very much intact. These are usually much more straight forward; they either replicate the experience well by allowing Wii owners who don’t have access to other machines, the experience that they might have otherwise missed out on, or they lose too much in downsizing to fit the Wii and get written off as inferior versions.

Then finally are the gameplay designs that are far riskier but can result in even better games. I'm talking about popular franchises that get made on the Wii, but altered in some ways that skate on the fine line between great and why-did-they-do-that-to-the-franchise-I-love. Let's start with an example of a good game; Anno 1404. The game is basically a streamlined version of the PC game, with some elements removed or minimised, But the game that is found of the Wii is a great game that just wouldn't have reached anywhere close to the end product if it wasn't changed, as a direct port would have resulted in poor graphics, frame rate and subsequently, gameplay. Then there is MySims, which was a game that just missed the mark but had the potential to be good, which came late with MySims Kingdom. Although the franchise is similar, the game moved away from what made the Sims on the PC such a hit and moved into lesser known territory and it was a gamble, but it definitely paid off in the end with more fluid gameplay and really took advantage of what the Wii could do.

This all brings me onto the current thorn in my side; Spore. I can’t get too critical of the game as it hasn’t been released, and if it turns out to be good then I will wholeheartedly apologise for burying the game before it was born, but even if the game does turn out to be good, why would a developer release the game as it is, with a lot less features and questionable additions, unless they were doing it just to make more money. Everyone who has played Spore will tell you that the creature creation and customising aspects are great, but the problem is that the rest of the gameplay was an inconsistent mess, with some elements actually being quite interesting but overall it got old fast, and left very little reason to keep playing. Now EA have released an expansion pack that addresses those issues by allowing people to create their own missions as well as play other peoples. So they knew the problem was there and tried to rectify it. And now what are they doing? They are releasing Spore on the Wii with customising options, which is great, but they are added on some Monster battle gameplay that just appears to be half-arsed, and it looks like they are completely ignoring the obvious problem with the PC Spore, thinking that because it’s on the Wii that they can get away with it.

I am not sure what my point is with all this. Maybe I don’t have a point. Maybe I am just sick of developers shoe horning their franchises onto other systems in an effort to make some easy money. Maybe I just want developers to make more original games for the Wii that are made for the Wii and really take advantage of its assets. Maybe I just want more Mario Galaxies’, Zack & Wiki’s, No more heroes, Boom Blox, De blobs, Metroids, Smash brothers etc, and less games that have to be altered beyond recognition to make it onto the Wii. Maybe I really did have no point.