That was my method too!  I was never happier to have a Japanese phone with a good video recorder! 

uh, not really. adventure games tell stories in a considerably different way than most RPGs - especially JRPGs, which are usually the pointlessly long ones. And that's taking into account that there are, unfortunately, two completely different game genres filed under 'adventure' (classic computer-style adventure and zelda-style action-adventure), and the former splits up further (Sierra/Lucasarts-school of adventure and Myst series-style of adventure). Let's call these A (Zelda), B (Sierra), and C (Myst).

(A) adventure games , quite frankly, usually have a shallow and often inspid plot with paper-thin characters (actually, this describes most videogames, but bear with me). They may try and make up for it with a lot of dialogue and attempts to diversify the cast, but they rarely try to match the depth of the story to the time you'll spend on the game.

(B) games generally deliver considerably more interesting and intensive stories with considerably more complex characters over a drastically shorter period of time.....or at least, they make a better and more honest effort than (A) adventure games in trying to make a good story.

(C) adventure games _____ ____ _____ ____ X54Z3X232X3X }@$*()# [lever] [lever] [button]

Writing on the screen?!  Wow, you must have really wanted to beat that guy.   :-)

"Some people complained about Zelda having too little content, so I find it strange that people complain about a Zelda-like game with a lot more content."

"I think it's obvious these people who complain about too much content are also the one's looking for "mature" games.  They just don't identify with a game that is different.  They really just want the same old thing."

"People complain about a 40-50 hour adventure game being too much, yet some will gladly play an RPG of the same length.  Hypocrisy!"

Okay, you may like Okami and the majority of us on this thread may not, but you can't just say crazy things like this without any sort of evidence.  I don't think anybody in this thread said they disliked Okami because it was not "mature" or because it wasn't an RPG.

I admit the above statement I made is overly broad and unsubstantiated.

I should ask how many of you like Zelda games, but don't like Okami. To me, both games fall into the typical Japanese adventure genre, so I'm puzzled why people complain about Okami's length and not Zelda's.  I really don't find Okami's length substantially longer than a typical Zelda game.  All other faults of Okami (i.e. Issun providing tutorials in the middle of a dungeon) are valid, as I've seen them, bu they didn't bother me as much.

New content + $30.00 price tag would equal a win for me.  I never beat it the first time, but the chance to play it at 480i and with a few new missions has me drooling for it.

You can play it at 480i on a PS2 already.  If you had a PS3 you could play it higher than the 480p of the Wii with the right wires, but you don't get the waggle controls!

Well, Ready at Dawn has come out and said that the Wii version will feature absolutely nothing new other than the waggle controls.  They even expertly dodged questions about performance improvements which basically tells me that we shouldn't expect any.  Having already put 64 hours in to complete the PS2 version, it's highly unlikely that I'll be buying this unless I can find it for $10 or less at some point in the future.

http://wii.ign.com/articles/828/828620p1.html

Looks like MTV agrees with you Okami-changers out there:  http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2007/10/ … okami-wii/

That MTV bitched and moaned about lots of the side quests, which is just plain stupid.  If you don't want to play a long game to full completion, stick to the game's main objectives.  The only thing I agree with is a skip/auto-scroll dialog function.  In fact, I'd like to see an unlockable stage where you can choose to re-fight any boss you want.

From what I hear, it's going to be a direct port of the PS2 code, no additions, no nothing except for integration of Wii controls.  From what I remember playing, they're not going to be that revolutionary to the game.  Sure things might get done faster, but that's about it.

So, I picked up the Wii version of Okami (one of the first-press limited edition IGN watermark-featured box covers, no less!) and I put it through a couple of paces.  There's the obvious question as to whether or not the game deserves a double-dip or not, and I honestly don't have an answer for that just yet.  Here's what I think so far. 

There's definitely an obvious graphical difference, where everything has a greater contrast and color saturation is much stronger.  The rich color palette is amplified, further punctuating the game's breathtaking graphics.  The tradeoff - and this can be good thing or bad, depending on your own preference - is the reduction of the paper filter effect. This results in a sharper, cleaner looking image, but it sacrifices that slightly dreamy, wavy effect of the original.  Personally, I like the new look better.  I also love the fact that the game is now in 16:9 widescreen -- and at 480p, it guarantees that the game will make a respectable showing on any supported TV.   

Gametrailers.com has a pretty good side-by-side comparison video up, which showcases the new graphical changes:   

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/32960.html

On the other hand, Ready At Dawn seems to have made no attempt at smoothing out the occasional stutters of framerate.  Load times in between areas are notably shorter, and while one can appreciate the fact that there's now a "skip cutscene" feature right from the start, I am sorely disappointed that there isn't a quick-text option.  So, it's either slog through some of those ridiculously-long passages of text at an equally ridiculously-slow default speed, or skip the scene outright, thereby missing some possible crucial story moments.  Hell.

The controls have been generally okay.  No complaints about Ammy's general movements, like running and jumping.  The free-camera mapped to the Wiimote's d-pad works better than expected, but still nowhere near as user-friendly and intuitive as the PS2's right analog stick.  I really haven't gotten into many battles yet (only just got to Hana Valley), but the basic attack/headbutt charge feels a tad cumbersome to pull off, now that you have to swing/waggle the remote for each maneuver.  Maybe I'll get used to it, but I really wished they mapped the Attack to a face button.  Everyone says that the Fleetfoot dodge technique is the biggest offender with the new control scheme, handled poorly with the Nunchuck's motions.  I'll obviously need to see how it is once I've earned the move.

The celestial brush, on the other hand, is an absolute dream to use.  Your movements are infinitely more quicker and liberating, which makes whipping out the brush at any given opportunity a blast.  Assuming the game can maintain and detect the required accuracy for the later celestial techniques that you learn, I'd say that this is unquestionably the best new feature of the Wii version.

So..... I dunno yet.  I bought the game out of sheer fandom, but if you're looking for any substantial reason to double-dip, there might not be one.  And because of some of the technical shortcomings, I hesitate to call this a "definitive" version, either - at least, not in the same way that I would consider Resident Evil 4 Wii.  One may do just as well with the PS2 version, and as much as I love the improved celestial brush controls, it's likely not enough to pull people back in again.

I tried this game out at Nintendo World, and using the Wii remote to use the Celestial Brush was glitchy.  The brush would jump around or sometimes not press down.  It could be the store's set up though. 

The way you attack by waggling is not great for this game.  I think this was a "let us use the remote for something" rather than thinking whether the waggle was even appropriate.

It also doesn't have a simple way of putting the camera behind you instantly.

Speaking of IGN watermarks, Capcom is offering a choice of replacement for the slipcover --- http://www.capcom.com/artredemption/  Personally, I can't decide---the two new ones are just pictures, no title on the side, no Wii logo or game info or anything.  So, the OCD anal side of me isn't big on that, but the collector side of me is like, "ooooh, pretty!"

Which one do you guys choose, if any, and why, or why not?

I like the idea of the second two, but I'd be too anal to get one without the name on the spine.  It'd just look too weird on the shelf!  I'd choose the non-watermarked regular one (I rather like that cover design to begin with, actually).

I'm just wonderin' how the IGN watermark made it onto the official art cover to begin with.

.

I'd say whatever design monkey was putting the artwork together thought it was quicker to pull a pic from IGN at his desk than to get up and track down a CD of official artwork.

Yep, it does.  Pressing the "2" button on the remote allows you switch to predetermined camera angles, including the view from behind.

At least it's mapped to a button that's easy to reach. </sarcasm>

That is not the instant "behind the avatar" camera reset that some other games have.  Although you have stated a way to get the camera back to this view, that means the player has to toggle through the predetermined camera views to get to it.  In addition, as Zane said, the 2 button is not a convenient place for toggling the camera.

I wonder if text-speed issues are simply the result of translating games from Japanese to English without changing the speed at which text is displayed. While displaying text at six characters per second (or whatever) is maddeningly slow in English, it might be much more tolerable in Japanese, in which individual characters contain more information and take longer to subvocalize.

.

And now there's word that Clover has been erased from the credits. Way to go, Capcom! Man, f--- this port.

You know, I have to say I feel bad for Clover Studio as well - and this just reinforces it. Capcom doesn't seem to have any problem raping their work like a dead corpse.

I totally agree.  Even though Okami's copyrights do belong to Capcom (Clover Studio was a wholly-owned subsidiary), the credits are one of the few ways to indicate that developers did work on the game.  Boo on Capcom!

I haven't opened mine yet, so I'm taking it back tomorrow.

No amount of improved resolution is worth something like this.

I popped in my review copy...and so far, I'm not digging the new controls. It's like there's a whole new level of precision required for some of the brush strokes. I also haven't gotten the hang of the waggle fighting, either. I'm guess I'm still used to the simple button mashing I did with the PS2 version. Ugh.

QFT.  Pretty much all my desires to get this version have flown out the window with the numerous "Oops" that Capcom have made.  It looks better on the PS2 anyway.