# I have an Issue With You Nintendo. BIG Issue. (Rant)



## Judge Spear (Oct 10, 2012)

Keep in mind, ahead is strictly my opinion. I know bashing Nintendo is taboo, buuuut I think I want to say some things. This is a long one. TL;DR at the bottom.

For years now, I, like many, feel as though companies have been seriously bullshitting with games for reasons other than Call of Duty. We've seen an absurd amount of cancellations, in game scams, faulty hardware, faulty software, creative droughts, you know the deal. But, people raise an eyebrow at me when I say the reigning champ in bullshit as a whole is the company that saved the industry. The company everyone grew up with and adores so much. The company that I used to back fervently like a little drone. Well that changed in a few short years.

I'll be the only one in the world to admit my controversial opinion right now that I find Nintendo to be _WORSE_ in terms of greed and milking than Activision could ever aspire to be with CoD.

This company has gotten so unabashedly cocky with their franchises and _lazy_.
Mario had without a doubt the worst anniversary I have ever seen. Repackage an old Super Nintendo game and make sure it's the version without Super Mario World. Slap an arbitrary music disc in there with some pictures. Done. No enhancements to the game. Repackage something already seen not one, not two, but _three_ times before, and give a console 3 gens ahead the inferior 4th version. 

Ocarina of Time? Let's port it four times and pretend the latest version is something truly original for our new handheld. Right along with Starfox no less. further making certain that fans of our favorite anthro pilots only see this "series" as one title, because let's face it, how often do you ever hear anyone talk about any other installment besides Starfox 64? So port it a third time, Nintendo.
The 3DS digital library...ports and shovelware with an occasional original (there's the word!) gem like Wayforward's Mighty Switch Force. NES games we've all played. Soon Gameboy advance games. Gameboy stuff. Seriously?

Mario Galaxy 2...blatant rehash. New Super Mario Bros 1. Great game. Mario Bros Wii, I didn't really like it, but it had purpose...New Super Mario Bros 2 and U. The novelty is getting old. After 4 fucking games, it's not "New" anymore. The retro pandering is running stale. You would think that a company's debut into HD, something they were bashed for all gen, would want to show off the power of this new system with a glorious 3D title involving their flagship mascot. Of course not. Play it safe great innovative Nintendo.

Kirby, poor Kirby. I believe a franchise can only hit twenty years old once, correct? And how to mark such a great milestone? Ports. Another damn collection. That would make the original Dreamland being ported 5 times. Why not something new that embraces everything we love about Kirby with some creativity? Kirby 4 did it.
I wonder why they can't take Wayforward's example with Contra 4 for an Anniversary title, a small third party. Or better yet, Sonic Generations and you can say what you want about him, Sega did something different for the Blue Blur's big 20 whether you liked it or not. 

Where is F-Zero? Where is Starfox (no, 3D doesn't count to me)? What are your plans for fixing Team Ninja's Metroid mistake? What new concepts do you have? Nothing is annouced. I'm sick of rumors and what they want to do, how about what they're _going_ to do? Hideki Kamiya is dying to create a Starfox. LET HIM!!

This company is on a thread for me. I felt cheated by them far more than anyone else (Konami is trailing close behind) this gen. My 3DS wasn't moved for 3 months before Pokemanz. My Wii has been played twice...in 12 months. How is it that I have more retail exclusives on my Xbox than my Wii without owning a single Halo or Gears? This is ridiculous. My standards are high, but SHIT!

TL;DR: I'm sick of the retro pandering, ports, useless collections, piss easy handholding games (something I SURPRISINGLY neglected to mention), lack of originality, rehashing, drought of games even before Wii U development.

I'm aware people still like this company, and that's fine. I don't dislike the fans, just Nintendo so don't take this personally.


----------



## Percy (Oct 10, 2012)

Looks like they're running out of ideas.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 10, 2012)

> Let's port it four times and pretend the latest version is something truly original for our new handheld. Right along with Starfox no less.


Ocarina 3D wasn't a _port_; it was a complete rebuild from the ground up.  They overhauled all of the game's graphics resources (both 2D and 3D), fixed some flawed control issues (aka: the Iron Boots), and included both the original and Master Quest versions on the same cart.



> Mario Galaxy 2...blatant rehash.


...but did you _enjoy playing_ it?



> What new concepts do you have? Nothing is annouced.


...because Nintendo is one of the best at keeping their future projects under wraps.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Oct 10, 2012)

I hold pretty much the same opinion on Nintendo, and it's why I'm no longer buying into their stuff. I have all the older, nostalgic games from Nintendo and what not - I have one of my friends Gamecubes, no idea where all the cords are, and I only ever liked 1 game on it (Melee). I tried the Wii, but it just didn't do anything for me, and that rhymes, though I was especially disappointed with Brawl. Mario, beyond the Gameboy games, has never been fun for me, and even with the Gameboy games, it's still not my first choice in games due to having played them for over 15 years now. 

They keep re-releasing the classics (which wasn't a bad thing initially, but after the 3rd...4th...5th time, it's ridiculous), which I already own, and the newer games are just not my cup of tea (somewhat do to the controller), though I do play Mario Party when I get the chance. With the WiiU, it's been a disappointing outlook since announcement, and I'm fairly certain it's the end of the line for me in regards to Nintendo. 

From childhood awesomeness of the 90's to early 2000's, to a 'meh' and a shrug of the shoulders from 2006 onwards. I do have a hankering for Vigilante 8 2nd Offense though.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 10, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> Ocarina 3D wasn't a _port_; it was a complete rebuild from the ground up.  They overhauled all of the game's graphics resources (both 2D and 3D), fixed some flawed control issues (aka: the Iron Boots), and included both the original and Master Quest versions on the same cart.
> 
> 
> ...but did you _enjoy playing_ it?
> ...



Ocarina of Time has been played before on three other systems. New graphics is not new gameplay. New menus is not new gameplay. In the general sense, it's a port. It's an old game put on another system.

No, I hated Galaxy 2. I sold it after the 8th level when I realized there was nothing new and felt I was cheated. Perhaps it's not a cheat, but I don't care because I felt jipped. I felt I payed $50 for DLC. Capcom would be proud.

You don't keep big projects under wraps like that at E3 for your NEW SYSTEM coming out that year especially if you say you want a specific fanbase back. Were you in that stream? When it was over, caps rage from everyone. I am dead fucking serious. We knew a Mario was coming. Pikmin 3 was announced in 2008. And ports, ports, and more ports.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Oct 10, 2012)

But OoT has the gyroscopic, Which makes aiming alot easier.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 10, 2012)

Imperial Impact said:


> But OoT has the gyroscopic, Which makes aiming alot easier.



If it ain't a port (which I still say it is), then it's still a shameless rehash feeding off of nostalgia for profit. Sad part is it works for Nintendo. Every time.


----------



## Teal (Oct 10, 2012)

Not all of us had the console they originated on, ports are the only way to play.


----------



## Ranguvar (Oct 10, 2012)

The last Nintendo game I thoroughly enjoyed was Metroid Prime on the cube and it was not even developed by Nintendo but by Retro out in Texas. Come to think of it I have not really enjoyed Nintendo properties since the snes.


----------



## Vaelarsa (Oct 10, 2012)

I don't mind that they keep releasing endless ports of their old games, because people like that, and if they sell off their old consoles and old games to make way for new ones, then they can keep playing their favorites on the new system.
Or, if people have never gotten to play the originals, either because they are young or new to gaming or weren't able to get ahold of the console or game, then there's that, too.

Maybe I'm just kind of biased because the grand majority of the games I continue to re-play, are ones I've been playing since I was little.
Given the choice between playing something like... say... Skyrim, or the original Metroid, I will play the original Metroid. Even though I've found everything in it, and even though I've beaten it several times.
Nintendo is becoming pretty synonymous with "that company for nostalgiafags," but that's their market. These are franchises they've had for decades.
Microsoft and Sony have taken up the mantle of bringing new franchises to the gaming market, and let them.

My main gripe with Nintendo is just all this "I wonder how inconvenient we can make it to play a game" shit they've been doing with their consoles lately.
First all this motion control junk, and now some kind of bulky touchscreen controller for a tv-screen game.
Ugh. No thank you.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 10, 2012)

Vaelarsa said:


> I don't mind that they keep releasing endless ports of their old games, because people like that, and if they sell off their old consoles and old games to make way for new ones, then they can keep playing their favorites on the new system.
> Or, if people have never gotten to play the originals, either because they are young or new to gaming or weren't able to get ahold of the console or game, then there's that, too.
> 
> Maybe I'm just kind of biased because the grand majority of the games I continue to re-play, are ones I've been playing since I was little.
> ...



I can see that. I'm just the type of person that wants new content. I wouldn't mind ports, but put some restraint on it, damn. I say port when it's appropriate. Yeah yeah, I know, I'm just a furfag on a forum so I have no authority, but seriously. A collection as an anniversary gift? You couldn't do something more? I could understand if it was something never before released in either a region or on a console like all five games in Gradius Collection. And why not port something else instead of the same NES games thirty times? Like...Gamecube games. Or Mario Kart Arcade GP 1 and 2. Those would be a treat. And it's not a hard request. WipEout 2048's only DLC was WipEout HD/Fury ported directly from the PS3 to the Vita for a measly $13. Free if it was already owned on the console.

And I must say the Wii U is looking mighty stupid. I agree with you. I've heard every argument for it under the sun. There is no way you can make me see it as anything other than a glorified DS touch screen.


----------



## Percy (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> I can see that. I'm just the type of person that wants new content. I wouldn't mind ports, but put some restraint on it, damn. I say port when it's appropriate. Yeah yeah, I know, I'm just a furfag on a forum so I have no authority, but seriously. A collection as an anniversary gift? You couldn't do something more? I could understand if it was something never before released in either a region or on a console like all five games in Gradius Collection. And why not port something else instead of the same NES games thirty times? Like...Gamecube games. Or Mario Kart Arcade GP 1 and 2. Those would be a treat. And it's not a hard request. WipEout 2048's only DLC was WipEout HD/Fury ported directly from the PS3 to the Vita for a measly $13. Free if it was already owned on the console.
> 
> And I must say the Wii U is looking mighty stupid. I agree with you. I've heard every argument for it under the sun. There is no way you can make me see it as anything other than a glorified DS touch screen.



I wonder what Nintendo will release on, say, the NES's 30th anniversary.
But I agree, the Wii U is probably something I'm going to pass on. The concept seemed kind of cool, but it doesn't seem to have much going for it in my opinion.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> In the general sense, it's a port. It's an old game put on another system.


Well, I can agree with that.  But mind your terminology once in awhile or somebody'll call you out on it. 

And like already said, it's inevitable that sometimes the only way a player will ever see game X is via ports or remakes on current systems (or videos on YouTube).



Vaelarsa said:


> My main gripe with Nintendo is just all this "I wonder how inconvenient we can make it to play a game" shit they've been doing with their consoles lately.
> First all this motion control junk, and now some kind of bulky touchscreen controller for a tv-screen game.


When motion control works, it _works_.  It's only annoying when it's not done right (or if the available hardware isn't up to the task, like with Wii Sports 1).



XoPachi said:


> And I must say the Wii U is looking mighty stupid. I agree with you. I've heard every argument for it under the sun. There is no way you can make me see it as anything other than a glorified DS touch screen.


And the DS touch screen turned out to be one of its best features.  Whodathunk?


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 10, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> And the DS touch screen turned out to be one of its best features.  Whodathunk?



Yes, but that was the 2004 DS handheld. Make something new for the 2012 Wii U console. Or at least something practical. You won't even be able to buy the damn controllers retail outside of Japan because of their absurd production costs. And of course the screen was it's best feature. It was basically it's only feature.


----------



## Sutekh_the_Destroyer (Oct 10, 2012)

I'd say Nintendo is still up to it, but that the only problem is that they're a bit clingy to their franchises. Not that they can't still produce great games with their franchises- Super Mario Galaxy and The Legend of Zelda : Skyward Sword being examples of that, but as previously said in this thread, New Super Mario Bros. is getting a bit stale. I also agree with the good things said about the ports in this thread. To me, having never had access to an N64, the 3D version of Ocarina of Time for the 3DS was the only way to play it.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 10, 2012)

I think this is because when nintendo tries something new, people bash it. So they stick to what people are cozy with and make profit off of that. I will agree with you and say that when they try to be original nowadays, they either do it the wrong way (pokemon colosseum)or they don't put enough effort into what could've been something great (pokemon conquest)


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 10, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> I think this is because when nintendo tries something new, people bash it. So they stick to what people are cozy with and make profit off of that. I will agree with you and say that when they try to be original nowadays, they either do it the wrong way (pokemon colosseum)or they don't put enough effort into what could've been something great (pokemon conquest)



You make a good point. Fans cried about virtually every first party Gamecube title with Metroid being the only one spared...until Other M when it split the Metroid community down the middle.

Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker, Starfox Assault, Kirby Air Ride, F-Zero GX. And even if they got good praise, fans found the smallest reasons to hate them entirely. But they grew on to Wind Waker at least.

So it begs the question...why do fans call them innovators when they don't want them to innovate? Then they bash CoD for doing exactly what they want Nintendo to do. I suppose because one has color and nostalgia, it gets a free pass.



Sutekh_the_Destroyer said:


> Not that they can't still produce great games with their franchises- Super Mario Galaxy and The Legend of Zelda : Skyward Sword being examples of that



I'm not trying to refute your claims. The following has no relevance. I can just never resist expressing this. 
The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword is quite literally, the absolute worst video game I have ever played since 2000. I found that putrid abomination of gaming more foul than DNF, Sonic 06, and Metroid Other M stitched together and multiplied by however many cubic centimeters create our universe. You couldn't pay me enough to put that miserable fuckload of ass in my Wii. I'd consider buying an Atari 2600 and a copy of E.T. at their original price before I'm rewarded for even looking at the title screen of Skyward Sword again. Explaining why I hate it in detail would crash FAF indefinitely.

It is one of the reasons I'm sick of Nintendo, but I left it out entirely because it's just me disliking a game. It happens.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> You make a good point. Fans cried about virtually every first party Gamecube title with Metroid being the only one spared...until Other M when it split the Metroid community down the middle.
> 
> Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker, Starfox Assault, Kirby Air Ride, F-Zero GX. And even if they got good praise, fans found the smallest reasons to hate them entirely. But they grew on to Wind Waker at least.
> 
> So it begs the question...why do fans call them innovators when they don't want them to innovate? Then they bash CoD for doing exactly what they want Nintendo to do. I suppose because one has color and nostalgia, it gets a free pass.



The Nintendo Wii. 


Also, I believe it's because if you look where Nintendo started and where they are now, you can say that the games have taken quite a change and have aged well, unlike other franchises that shouldn't have died off. Such franchises (seeing how their deaths might have spawned ill-feelings towards other companies) were Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, and megaman just to name a few. I personally don't think Nintendo is as creative as they use to be back in the day, but they're holding true to their original franchises quite well in not screwing them over like other companies did to their beloved starting figures.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> I'm not trying to refute your claims. The following has no relevance. I can just never resist expressing this.
> The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword is quite literally, the absolute worst video game I have ever played since 2000. I found that putrid abomination of gaming more foul than DNF, Sonic 06, and Metroid Other M stitched together and multiplied by however many cubic centimeters create our universe. You couldn't pay me enough to put that miserable fuckload of ass in my Wii. I'd consider buying an Atari 2600 and a copy of E.T. at their original price before I'm rewarded for even looking at the title screen of Skyward Sword again. Explaining why I hate it in detail would crash FAF indefinitely.


getaloadofthisguy.jpg


----------



## Dragoniss (Oct 10, 2012)

I dunno i'm a nintendo fangirl and always will be. 

But I will agree they are milking the tank with Mario and Kirby. I was really looking forward to something new and good with kirby but it didn't happen.The last good kirby game for me was crystal shards then again, same with Mario, i'm not a 2D platformed kinda person. I would have gotten the kirby anniversary thing but now that I bought another N64 [cause I wanted DK 64, Banjo Kazooie, and Diddy Kong Racing] I just got it on there.

Though I will have to disagree with some things.
At least they are trying with Zelda. They did make a whole new game for links 20th aka skyward sword and while you might have thought of it as abomination I simply loved it. I feel the game is amazing, the story is amazing, the motion controls just feel right. Thank god they didn't just take and make another zelda collection. And you must give them props that its much better than other franchises have been doing. Overall that game just felt right to me. 
[and if you're going to be THAT harsh on skyward sword then you're just looking for a fight that will get you knocked down by a crap ton of zelda fans who are true and loving to the series. Seriously I can take people saying they don't like it, its just taste in games I'm fine with that but when you go into that much detail over how much you hate it then your just being rude and ignorant.]

They are also coming out with a new Fire Emblem if anyone aside from me is actually into that series and are actually DOING DLC CONTENT FOR ONCE. So they are making some good decisions there.

And sure you may take that Pokemon black and white 2 are just again milking the tank its still a great game so far and its pokemon,people are going to go nuts for it.

All in all though you may not like ports but other people that don't have the older systems have no way to play these games other than emulation, and no matter what you say it is in the long run a smart move, people WILL but it and it WILL make them money. If its going to make them money then why not let them do it. And if you don't like it then play your other games. Nintendo won't care if people don't like ports when people still buy them.

Also @Vaelrsa
Have you held the tablet controller yet? Do you know it will feel clunky or not work well?
Don't say things like this until you've actually tried it out first.
I for one thought the stand that came with Kid Icarus was a dumb idea but it actually really worked well. You'll be shocked at how much thought nintendo puts into their products to make them comfortable for the majority of the population.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 10, 2012)

I hear the Wii U controller is surprisingly comfortable. I mean come on, everyone flipped a shit over the N64 remote, but it worked and was cozy. People flipped a shit over the gamecube remote, but it worked and was cozy. People flipped a shit over the wiimote,...... and rightfully so, so Nintendo added wiimotion plus to fix the problem. Either or, I kind of see a trend. :V



Also, DnD for the Wii U. It should happen. 



Double also, Skyward sword got silly when they had you run around all over the place catching butterflies. So silly!


----------



## Runefox (Oct 10, 2012)

The Super Mario All Stars re-release was pretty shit, I'll say that. I AM enjoying the New Super Mario Bros series of games, though, but they're hardly part of the "main series", which honestly hasn't been any good since SM64. Rehashing OoT and Star Fox 64 was more or less an announcement that nothing new and exciting was happening at Nintendo. I'll admit, I picked up SF64 3D because I fucking love Star Fox, but really, I feel dirty about it. Then the extra circle pad attachment happened.

But come on. Nintendo are the KINGS of rehash. The Wii is almost literally an overclocked Gamecube with some storage and a new OS.

Of course, Sony still flopped the Vita (through no fault of the hardware itself), and it was their legendary arrogance that cost them a huge amount of following during the opening days of the PS3.


----------



## Ranguvar (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> I'm not trying to refute your claims. The following has no relevance. I can just never resist expressing this.
> The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword is quite literally, the absolute worst video game I have ever played since 2000. I found that putrid abomination of gaming more foul than DNF, Sonic 06, and Metroid Other M stitched together and multiplied by however many cubic centimeters create our universe. You couldn't pay me enough to put that miserable fuckload of ass in my Wii. I'd consider buying an Atari 2600 and a copy of E.T. at their original price before I'm rewarded for even looking at the title screen of Skyward Sword again. Explaining why I hate it in detail would crash FAF indefinitely.



I am going to have to agree. How many times can Nintendo remake OOT?


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword is quite literally, the absolute worst video game I have ever played since 2000 ... [ snip ]



What is this I don't even



Runefox said:


> But come on. Nintendo are the KINGS of rehash. The Wii is almost literally an overclocked Gamecube with some storage and a new OS.


Which is part of why Nintendo's releasing the Wii U this year while Sony and MS are still marketing their current ones.

And speaking of them, unlike Sony and MS Nintendo doesn't really have other divisions to fall back to if its gaming goes flop.  (Yes it has two markets, console and handheld, but still.)


----------



## Teal (Oct 10, 2012)

Green_Knight said:


> I am going to have to agree. How many times can Nintendo remake OOT?





XoPachi said:


> I'm not trying to refute your claims. The following has no relevance. I can just never resist expressing this.
> The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword is quite literally, the absolute worst video game I have ever played since 2000. I found that putrid abomination of gaming more foul than DNF, Sonic 06, and Metroid Other M stitched together and multiplied by however many cubic centimeters create our universe. You couldn't pay me enough to put that miserable fuckload of ass in my Wii. I'd consider buying an Atari 2600 and a copy of E.T. at their original price before I'm rewarded for even looking at the title screen of Skyward Sword again. Explaining why I hate it in detail would crash FAF indefinitely.


 Everyone bashes SkywardSword now, but when the next one comes out suddenly everyone will bash it and love Skyward Sword.

My only problems with the game are it took too long to get going and it was too easy.

Who else here wants a remake of Majora's Mask?


----------



## Rheumatism (Oct 10, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> What are your plans for fixing Team Ninja's Metroid mistake?!



What can be done?  Metroid Other M was so fucking embarrassing.


----------



## Runefox (Oct 10, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> Which is part of why Nintendo's releasing the Wii U this year while Sony and MS are still marketing their current ones.


Yeah, and Sony and MSFT need a refresh just as badly. Well, maybe not AS badly, seeing as Ninty's been running on the same hardware for a decade... Still surprises me though how many people think their PS3 does 1080p gaming. It kind of... Well, technically does, but really doesn't. Most 360 and PS3 games run with the framebuffer at 720p or below (essentially 480p in 3D), then are scaled to the selected resolution (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, or 1080p). The Call of Duty series, for example, runs mainly at 1024x600, and Uncharted 3 runs at 720p, except in 3D mode where it runs at 896x504.

In any event, a full 1080p console would be a great start, tablet controller or not. Not that graphics are everything, but it would be nice for them *to at least match up with the TV screen you're viewing them on.*


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 10, 2012)

> then are scaled to the selected resolution (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, or 1080p).


Half the time it's the TV that actually performs the upscaling.  CRT's are/were pretty forgiving about non-native resolutions, but digitals ... not so much.


----------



## Runefox (Oct 11, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> Half the time it's the TV that actually performs the upscaling.  CRT's are/were pretty forgiving about non-native resolutions, but digitals ... not so much.



CRT's (at least, CRT's capable of any resolution other than standard NTSC 480i) don't actually have a native resolution, though they do have an optimal dot pitch based on the phosphor grille used for the display. Going under that wasn't an issue; Going over it caused blur. Old SDTV CRT's weren't capable of handling any other resolutions. Older consoles and TV-out on video cards that put out higher or lower than 480i line-doubled / resampled the output to match, respectively.

As for the consoles, they'll actually choose from the best of whichever resolution is set / the TV reports. The 360 provides native resolutions of DVI/VGA monitors, but the PS3 (and 360 hooked up to a proper TV) only offers 480i/480p/720p/1080i/1080p. The console will by default use the highest available resolution for the TV, and will do the scaling itself to match whichever resolution is chosen / auto-selected in any case.

So a PS3 or 360 set to output 720p will scale everything to 720p before outputting to the display. For the X-Box, unless you have a new slim 360, you should set this to 720p for the display to scale (since everything is first scaled to 720p on the 360 anyway, since that's its proper display resolution). For PS3, it should be 1080p. Either way, a 1080p display will end up with a blurry image from either console unless the PS3 is running a 1080p movie, or the 360 is streaming something in 1080p. A 720p display, ironically, won't be so bad. But there will still be blur because the rendering resolution is usually lower.

Long story short, render everything at 1080p (3D included) until 4k catches on and I'll be happy. As far as scaling to displays that are less than 1080p goes, downscaling is always better than upscaling, so it's preferable anyway.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 11, 2012)

Runefox said:


> CRT's (at least, CRT's capable of any resolution other than standard NTSC 480i) don't actually have a native resolution...


Precisely.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 11, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> I think this is because when nintendo tries something new, people bash it. So they stick to what people are cozy with and make profit off of that. I will agree with you and say that when they try to be original nowadays, they either do it the wrong way (pokemon colosseum)or they don't put enough effort into what could've been something great (pokemon conquest)



1) Ugh, god, yes. Beacuse people are quick to go "OMG GIMMICK" and bash it. You know Zelda's fanbase....
I remember back when Majora's Mask was the most recent Zelda game...and it was bashed widely as being inferior to Ocarina of Time. So then comes Wind Waker and...mysteriously, there are all sorts of Majora's Mask fans crawling out of the woodwork. Seriously, where did you guys come from?! It could have used your support back in the day! Then the same happens with Wind Waker when Twilight Princess comes out, and the same happened with Twilight Princess. It seems you guys are completely unable to appreciate any game unless there's a sequel you can bash. 

2) Nintendo is only the publisher and distributor. Contrary to popular belief, they actually publish a lot more games than they actually develop. A lot of them happen to be made through second or third party developers, or independent developers they hire. (iirc, the developers of PokÃ©mon Colosseum are an independent developer.) 


Heck I remember how everyone's talking about how too many sequels in E3 2012...four months later, and what's everyone talking about?
PokÃ©mon Black and White 2 
Borderlands 2
Torchlight 2
DotA 2
Guild Wars 2
Resident Evil 6

I think it's safe to say the amount of sequels and spinoffs in gaming is also the gamers' faults for always wanting more and for sequels as being a "guaranteed" sell. You think they're going to give huge budgets to games that aren't guaranteed to sell? I remember 2009...where people were bitching that Square-Enix was focusing too much on Final Fantasy. They announce they're developing and publishing a whole slew of non final fantasy titles. What's everyoen bitching about now? That Final Fantasy XIII wasn't out yet. 

If you want there to be new franchises, then *buy them* and give them a message that there is an interest in new games. Don't just bash 'em for being "dated" (Especially while giving other games that do the same a pass because of "Retro charm" or "omg they're indie.") or say "It's a ripoff of this franchise I like".


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 11, 2012)

Im glad nintendo kept pikman around. Also I feel you on the Majora's mask bit. The video game companies worst nightmare are the fans themselves. We've become too spoiled imo.


----------



## Percy (Oct 11, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> Im glad nintendo kept pikman around. Also I feel you on the Majora's mask bit. The video game companies worst nightmare are the fans themselves. We've become too spoiled imo.



I sense truth in this. It seems the fans have such high expectations for everything nowadays.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 11, 2012)

I'm back. Found it funny how some people got upset with something that was strictly an opinion. Me hating Skyward Sword is neither rude nor is it ignorant (ignorant means lacking knowledge). If you must know, I 100% the damn thing the week I got it in one shot, Skyward Sword problem #34423423. Only so I know what I'm talking about when topic arises. I don't mind or care that people like the game and I'll live with it. It doesn't bother me. Skyward Sword was the first Zelda I've disliked so strongly the only one previously being less favorable was Spirit Tracks, but I could still pick that up and play if for some reason I wanted too.

If you're going to get offended that I have an opinion of something you took no part in directly creating, you are on the wrong Internet. Because I can bet I could pick any FPS this gen and bash not only the game, but the people who enjoy it and the devs and people would either back me up or not care. lol

No, I'll never like the game even if a future installment is just as bad or worse (impossibly).

Now on to something Toshabi said about Pokemanz Conquest and simply put, I heard people really liked the game. What was wrong with it? Granted the high scores come from big reviewers whom of which I don't trust, but all my friends just raved about it. Personally, I don't like that style of game but that's just me.


----------



## Dragoniss (Oct 11, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> I'm back. Found it funny how some people got upset with something that was strictly an opinion. Me hating Skyward Sword is neither rude nor is it ignorant (ignorant means lacking knowledge). If you must know, I 100% the damn thing the week I got it in one shot, Skyward Sword problem #34423423. Only so I know what I'm talking about when topic arises. I don't mind or care that people like the game and I'll live with it. It doesn't bother me. Skyward Sword was the first Zelda I've disliked so strongly the only one previously being less favorable was Spirit Tracks, but I could still pick that up and play if for some reason I wanted too.
> 
> If you're going to get offended that I have an opinion of something you took no part in directly creating, you are on the wrong Internet. Because I can bet I could pick any FPS this gen and bash not only the game, but the people who enjoy it and the devs and people would either back me up or not care. lol
> 
> ...



I didn't say I was angry at you for hating the game, honestly like I said in my last post I could care less if you hate it or like it, its all on gaming choice, but going into the detail you went into about how much you hate the game is rude, and unnecessary. You can just say you hated the game and will probably never play it again, and leave it at that. Going into that much detail, i'm sorry, but it makes you sound childish and like you have to prove to everyone how much you hate the game, honestly we don't care how much you hate it, its just a video game.


I haven't plaid conquest. I play Fire Emblem to cure my tatics femboner but Black and White 2 that just came out have been a real blast.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 11, 2012)

People do it all the time, but fine. I'll leave it alone (and don't feel singled out, that wasn't just about your post).

I need to get back on top of Black and White 2. I reserved it, but I only beat the first two bosses. Game is great, but things (school) just keep getting in the way of playing it.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 11, 2012)

@xopachi: Don't get me wrong, the game was good, but it felt like it could've been so much better. It's what I meant by Nintendo not putting enough effort into it.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 11, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> @xopachi: Don't get me wrong, the game was good, but it felt like it could've been so much better. It's what I meant by Nintendo not putting enough effort into it.



Sounds like a lot of Nintendo games I'm seeing lately. Mario Galaxy 2 was such a slap in the face and speaking of Mario, has anyone else felt that Nintendo games have gotten extremely easy? It took me 10 years to Mario Bros 3 (I swear, that game is the fucking R-Type Final of platformers. ;- without a continue, but I had 800 lives in Mario 3D Land...on my friend's cart....that I borrowed for 2 days........and didn't beat. Great game, but no challenge even in the special world which is why I felt forced to resort to my emergency challenge, speedrunning. That's one example and NSMB2 is the other prime culprit. Why are my lives at all going into the _triple_ digits with no effort at all and enemies do diddly dick to try and decrease them? It's like I'm rewarded for simply playing. Not even little tykes need 999 lives.

I already said Skyward Sword was too easy. But, brilliant ass, boss money, Twilight Princess was easy even if a lot of puzzles were difficult. The fights were enjoyable, but they were still pushovers. It's just kind of sad. I understand why they do it, but geez. To this degree?

Maybe my standards of a challenge are too high (and if you know me, you'd understand the fuck why). I can't be alone on this though. 
I want another stupidly hard Nintendo game like F-Zero GX was. Well it wasn't that hard, but I could see why others think so.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 11, 2012)

Thats why we have dark souls: the legend of zelda all grown up!


----------



## SirRob (Oct 11, 2012)

Pokemon Conquest was developed by Tecmo Koei, not Nintendo.


----------



## Xeras'na Bladewing (Oct 11, 2012)

Out of anything Nintendo related, the Metroid series is the only franchise I will consistently play from Nintendo. Mario has lost most of its interest to me, because he's been reused way too much. 

Look, here's something that got on my nerves:

Mario anniversary: Gets a collection
Zelda anniversary: Gets a concert tour of its music
Kirby anniversary: Gets a collection
Metroid anniversary: Absolutely nothing. 

To us the fans, we saw Metroid's 25th anniversary, and celebrated it, even though Nintendo didn't even acknowledge it. Look I know Other M isn't the strongest entry in the series, but haven't they had enough time to be in pickup from Other M? 

Here's my nitpick about Other M. The game had solid mechanics, but the overall execution of the game left something to be desired. While I disagree with how Samus is portrayed within the game, there are good easter eggs and nudges for those of us who have loved the series (such as the true final boss being Phantoon). Overall, it isn't an amazing game, but it is one that I will keep playing. 

Still, nothing can top the Prime trilogy and Super Metroid for me, those four games are the best entries in the franchise by far.

I like Kirby and Zelda, but let's at least give props to the dark area of the Nintendo games. Metroid is the best Nintendo franchise, in my opinion, and I'd like to see the rumored Metroid Dread soon, if it ever releases.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 11, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> Thats why we have dark souls: the legend of zelda all grown up!



That's why I have my DoDonPachi's and WipEout. ;3



Xeras'na Bladewing said:


> Out of anything Nintendo related, the Metroid series is the only franchise I will consistently play from Nintendo. Mario has lost most of its interest to me, because he's been reused way too much.
> 
> Look, here's something that got on my nerves:
> 
> ...



I just want to know why Nintendo thinks every installment for anything other than Mario has to be some massive 90 year development now. I'd settle for a handheld Metroid sidescroller. Hell I want one now! Haven't seen one in 8 years. What's the hold up?

This is what I mean. While they make all these ports and enhanced rereleases, what they cold be doing is putting that money into smaller projects. 







(Konami can learn from this too. Fucking canceled Contra 3DS for another goddamn MAHTAL GEER SAWID port after 3 collections in a row. What the Hell?)


----------



## Percy (Oct 11, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> That's why I have my DoDonPachi's and WipEout. ;3


That's why I have all my non-Nintendo games.
...am I doing it right?

I haven't played many newer Nintendo games at all, except for Pokemon.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 11, 2012)

Digitalpotato said:


> 1) Ugh, god, yes. Beacuse people are quick to go "OMG GIMMICK" and bash it. You know Zelda's fanbase...
> .
> .
> .
> ...it seems you guys are completely unable to appreciate any game unless there's a sequel you can bash.


Maybe it's the five stages of bashing.  Some of them might -- heaven forbid -- over time learn to enjoy a game for what it IS (as opposed to what it's NOT).

But more likely, the fanbase is so huge that the divisions between who loves and hates a game are _not consistent_ between games, meaning it's different facets raising the complaints about each new title that's under development.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 12, 2012)

Percy said:


> That's why I have all my non-Nintendo games.
> ...am I doing it right?
> 
> I haven't played many newer Nintendo games at all, except for Pokemon.



They just get easier and easier. Well Pokemon has kept a consistent difficulty since Sapphire and Ruby. I was hoping Metroid Prime 3 would be as hard as 2 though.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 12, 2012)

Saying Skyward Sword is the worst game ever makes one sound like a big n00b to video games entirely.



That being said, yes I have a problem with Nintendo not making new franchises instead of hanging on to characters from 30 years ago. Super Mario is what we know of him today.

That isn't to say let go of the old properties. I think Nintendo has an advantage as not just a "Console maker" but maker of video games due to their franchise. I can't sit there and think or associate games with "Sony making them" though I know of a few, and same with X-box.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 12, 2012)

Now I'm a noob for my opinion, even though I've been around since the last days of NES. Wow.

Nevermind Skipped this ""


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 12, 2012)

One more thing. Have yall ever went back to play older games you thought were hard back in the day? I breezed through the "hard old school games" faster then the newer ones. The only exceptions were earthbound (which nintendo should remake) and megaman (not x).


----------



## Rheumatism (Oct 12, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> The only exceptions were earthbound (which nintendo should remake) and megaman (not x).


Well the first Megaman was stupidly hard in some spots.  I have to use the select trick to beat the Yellow Demon.  Later you got to beat I think it was Bomb Man, Fire Man and Guts Man all in a row right before you take on Dr. Wily.  With no Energy Tanks...  They practically give them away in the later entries.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 12, 2012)

I meant to say megaman series. Woops, my bad!

The platforming was rather tough in the other entries of the game. 2 and 4 were my favs


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 12, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> Now I'm a noob for my opinion, even though I've been around since the last days of NES. Wow.
> 
> Nevermind Skipped this ""



Play the ET game that was for Atari.
Play The Summer Olympics/Winter Olympics.
Play Xenophobe on NES Seriously WTF was that shit?
Play the TMNT game they put out before the Arcade Team-ups.

I can spend all day listing a lot worse games.
You have an opinion that it sucks - People don't have an issue with that

You say it's the worst video game? People will school you with a lot of video game history.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 12, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> One more thing. Have yall ever went back to play older games you thought were hard back in the day? I breezed through the "hard old school games" faster then the newer ones. The only exceptions were earthbound (which nintendo should remake) and megaman (not x).



Supernova on Super Nintendo was hard back in the day. I used to get stuck on the boss cheaply named Great Thing (giant armed whale battleship). I can beat it now with ease. I die occasionally, but I usually get a 1CC.



Arshes Nei said:


> Play the ET game that was for Atari.
> Play The Summer Olympics/Winter Olympics.
> Play Xenophobe on NES Seriously WTF was that shit?
> Play the TMNT game they put out before the Arcade Team-ups.
> ...



Well then, people will have to get over it. Simple as that. It's an opinion. A strong one, but an opinion on a game I doubt anyone here took part in the creation of no less. And no one was bashed at all. 
Worst game _I've_ played since 2000 were literally my words and I meant that. I can dislike any game I want more than any other game of my choosing. If people take offense or get annoyed, that's too bad. Because it's not that serious, right?
I already know video game history. Not hard to find out about if I didn't already, at least it shouldn't be. There's been no "schooling". Just a pointless argument now.

I stick to what I said.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 12, 2012)

Off topic but i really like you avatar xopachi. It gives a weird evil genius feel to your posts.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 12, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> I stick to what I said.



Till you get poster's remorse later asking us to close one of the topics again :/


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 12, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> Off topic but i really like you avatar xopachi. It gives a weird evil genius feel to your posts.



Oh if only. :3



Arshes Nei said:


> Till you get poster's remorse later asking us to close one of the topics again :/



Maybe.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 12, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> One more thing. Have yall ever went back to play older games you thought were hard back in the day? I breezed through the "hard old school games" faster then the newer ones.


And some of them were hard for reasons that are considered bad game design by today's standards.



			
				XoPachi said:
			
		

> [the] worst game _I've_ played since 2000 were literally my words and I meant that.


So on that note ... any idea what is the worst game you've played _before_ 2000?


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 13, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> And some of them were hard for reasons that are considered bad game design by today's standards.
> 
> 
> So on that note ... any idea what is the worst game you've played _before_ 2000?



Now that's a tough one. I was usually outside and didn't play many games. I also didn't develop my standards at the time or knew what "hype" was in regards to gaming. 
I guess that's why I chose 2000. xD

I think what would have been the worst from what I remember was some shitty ass computer game (Amiga most likely) my neighbor's grandpa had. Darius+. More like Darius+Shit! That game was nothing like the Darius Twin or Supernova I loved in the Super Nintendo, from what I recall anyway.
I tend to dislike games more when it poops on a franchise I care about a lot. This was one of those cases.


----------



## Armaetus (Oct 13, 2012)

Nintendo can go die for all I care, it is nothing but a shell of it's former self relreleasing the same (or mostly same) crap each year. If I want to play Mario I  will play the classic games on the N64, SNES or NES (via Wii virtual console) if I want some nostalgia.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 13, 2012)

Glaice said:


> Nintendo can go die for all I care, it is nothing but a shell of it's former self relreleasing the same (or mostly same) crap each year. If I want to play Mario I  will play the classic games on the N64, SNES or NES (via Wii virtual console) if I want some nostalgia.



I hear ya. Granted, I don't want them to die, but the retro pandering, safe route, and recycling is getting old. I wish they were as subtle with their Easter eggs as they were back in the day even on Gamecube. Now they just go HREY GUISE!! WE GOTS A LEGASEE every...fucking...game.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 14, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> Now that's a tough one. I was usually outside and didn't play many games. I also didn't develop my standards at the time or knew what "hype" was in regards to gaming.
> I guess that's why I chose 2000. xD


*nods*  2000 was about the point where I could actually have money to buy my own games, so I didn't really play much before then either.



> I tend to dislike games more when it poops on a franchise I care about a lot. This was one of those cases.


Define "poop".

(For me, the only game I can think of which I would give that label to is "Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly" on the PS2.  How the hell did that get past QA with so many obvious technical problems?  Minute-plus load times, framerate choppier than B-movie  stop motion, and script events that glitched hard enough you sometimes needed to reset and reload your save file.  How am I supposed to enjoy a game with crap that shouldn't have even made it _into_ the debugging phase, let alone out?)


----------



## Teal (Oct 14, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> (For me, the only game I can think of which I would give that label to is "*Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly" on the PS2*.  How the hell did that get past QA with so many obvious technical problems?  Minute-plus load times, framerate choppier than B-movie  stop motion, and script events that glitched hard enough you sometimes needed to reset and reload your save file.  How am I supposed to enjoy a game with crap that shouldn't have even made it _into_ the debugging phase, let alone out?)


 Large load times, constant freezing, choppy sound, music that is cuts out for no reason, all the glitching (including bottemless pits), terrible collision detection, stiff controls, choppy picture....


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 14, 2012)

Stratadrake said:


> *nods*  2000 was about the point where I could actually have money to buy my own games, so I didn't really play much before then either.
> 
> 
> Define "poop".
> ...



Define poop? Well let's see. I have three ways of judging that.
1.) If it's just a broken down incomplete mangled mess of programming even if it had potential (Sonic 06 and Darius+)
2.) A major departure, but not a spin off. Only the bare basic element of the game was kept in place while everything else was changed and/or downgraded (Kirby Epic Yarn)
3.) It's the same game as always except there's just been a vast removal of content/replayability/challenge/incentive so immense it's not even worth playing (Other M).

And Spyro...fuck new Spyro games although I heard one was rather decent after the PS1 years.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 15, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> One more thing. Have yall ever went back to play older games you thought were hard back in the day? I breezed through the "hard old school games" faster then the newer ones. The only exceptions were earthbound (which nintendo should remake) and megaman (not x).



You become genre-savvy. You know how the games work and know what to expect. 



Stratadrake said:


> Maybe it's the five stages of bashing.  Some of them might -- heaven forbid -- over time learn to enjoy a game for what it IS (as opposed to what it's NOT).
> 
> But more likely, the fanbase is so huge that the divisions between who loves and hates a game are _not consistent_ between games, meaning it's different facets raising the complaints about each new title that's under development.




Ah yes, the vindication by history. The problem with that is that if a game is granted immunity to criticism three years later, the damage has already been done by so-called fans of the series who're really just fans of a specific entry in the series, and can't accept that maybe the game can't be different! 

And by damage being done, I mean creators interest being soured to make another one. By the time people show there's demand for a new game since the old one is granted Immunity to Criticism, they could have moved onto other projects. :/




Arshes Nei said:


> Play the ET game that was for Atari.
> Play The Summer Olympics/Winter Olympics.
> Play Xenophobe on NES Seriously WTF was that shit?
> Play the TMNT game they put out before the Arcade Team-ups.
> ...




Yeah, Skyward Sword is the worst game? Uhm...no...I think games today are objectively _better_ than many of the old games specifically because there's more quality control. Whenever I see those "Worst games of all time" threads, I laugh at how people list _playable_ games.


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 15, 2012)

Digitalpotato said:


> Yeah, Skyward Sword is the worst game? Uhm...no...I think games today are objectively _better_ than many of the old games specifically because there's more quality control. Whenever I see those "Worst games of all time" threads, I laugh at how people list _playable_ games.



"In my opinion"
 "to me" 
"worst I've actually played since 2000". Seems a lot of people selectively skip over these small, but very crucial words.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 15, 2012)

Even then if tha'ts the worst you played, then you're quite fortunate you haven't had to suffer from the same shit we did.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 15, 2012)

Digitalpotato said:


> Even then if tha'ts the worst you played, then you're quite fortunate you haven't had to suffer from the same shit we did.



Reminds me of gamer entitlement.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 16, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> "In my opinion"
> "to me"
> "worst I've actually played since 2000".
> Seems a lot of people selectively skip over these small, but very crucial words.


And Arshes Nei explained that for you.

My opinion about Skyward Sword?  Graphics / art style = awesome.  Not just the cel lighting but the impressionistic background effects.  Though I did mind Link's seemingly upturned nostrils.  Gameplay = Solid.  Well, aside from having trouble learning how to fly the Loftwing and some inevitable tedium having to fly form point A to B, once on the ground, all the classic Zelda series staples are present and accounted for.  The A button doubling as a general-purpose "dash" button is an interesting choice (admit it, back in Ocarina the 70% of the time you hit the A button solely to do field/combat rolls), item buttons are in place.  Nunchuk waggle for using the shield is also an interesting choice, and it works.  You actually need some REFLEXES to deflect projectiles off your shield (unlike Ocarina), shield HP was definitely a factor I have mixed opinions on (I ended up using the Sacred Shield a lot simply because it repairs itself -- though I did lose it against the final boss.  Ouch.)  And full sword control makes combat a lot more interesting because now you actually have to pay attention to _your_ swordplay (as even the humble Deku Baba or Bokoblin can deflect a sword strike from the wrong angle).  On the downside, Link's sword arm looks really stiff since he's always holding it out in the same position as the player's Wii Remote.  Level design = impressive.  Some of the level-specific gimmicks are better than others, and revisiting the same forest/volcano/desert areas over and over again isn't everyone's cup of tea (though when the Water Dragon flooded the whole forest that did make things quite interesting).  Those spirit challenges you had to do (i.e. the stealth missions) were "okay", not many people like stealth missions (self included) but they weren't too difficult, really (I think I only failed one once).  As for the main dungeons, I particularly liked the Time Stones in the desert and the way you can rearrange the layout of the final dungeon to forge your paths through it.  Most puzzles were solved fairly easily, almost too easily but perhaps that's just because (like many players) I'm wise to most puzzles a Zelda game can throw at you (though I DID get stuck on those wheel-combination ones.  The one in the ancient cistern I solved with a simple "hail mary cross" (didn't even find the clues until later), but the one in the ancient pirate ship had me stuck for near 30 minutes even after I revealed the clues to solve it by.  Yes, it did take me that long to figure out the differences between them and how they related to the puzzle.  It's good to get hung up on something occasionally but solve it with your own effort instead of resorting to an FAQ or guide.)  Bosses were surprisingly involving:  Not just a simple affair of "use item X to stun the boss for 10 seconds so you can whack away at its weak point" like Ocarina of Time made _so_ famous -- the first boss, Ghirahim, actually BEAT me the first time around (which for a Zelda game rarely happens to me).

As for the story ... perhaps not great, but definitely "good enough".  In retrospect I see how it's meant as an origin story for about 80% of the Zelda mythos.

But I guess I'm digressing.  It's not the _most_ entertaining Zelda game I've played, nor the Zelda setting I love the most, but it was definitely a Zelda game, and I definitely enjoyed it.  (I should probably go back and try Hero Mode sometime, I hear it's tougher.)


----------



## Plantar (Oct 16, 2012)

If you want a hard game, play Dragon Warrior III. The difficulty curve will kill ya. :J


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 16, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> Reminds me of gamer entitlement.




Yep. There are things gamers put up with that other industries wouldn't tolerate, but there's a much *much* bigger "entitlement culture" around gaming and tech than other industries would tolerate.

"I have nothing but complaints to you, but I continue to buy all your stuff anyways and do nothing but complain about that, too. Then a few years later when you try to assess my complaints, now have nothing but praise for somethign that, three years ago, I absolutely *hated*!" 
"Warriors don't need to do any abilities. they just need feats. What? Me play a warrior? OF course not...they're fucking *BORING*!" 
"I don't know how to crowd control or counter this character who has a well defined counter. They need to be nerfed." 
"Resident Evil 6 sucks. Oh, it's not even out yet. We're like Leiberman and don't even need to play the game to know how bad it is!" 
"We claim to be fans of the series, but we're really just fans of specific entries. Whenever we say what we want for the series, we're not always going to mention progression...we just want more games to be like our favourite entry in the series. We just want more games like this."
"We hated Morrowind because it was the symbol for everything wrong in the gaming industry and was dumbed down. Oh no, now that Oblivion's out, we like Morrowind. Wait, you mean you saw us going around bashing Morrowind for being dumbed down? I do not know what you are talking about." 
"We're not going to give constructive criticism...we're just going to bash fundamental gameplay tropes as 'flaws' and bitch that the game as not being action-y enough!"


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 16, 2012)

Digitalpotato said:


> You become genre-savvy. You know how the games work and know what to expect.



BINGO! 

The reason why you feel that Nintendo is lame and a shell of its former self is because you're not the target audience anymore. Their new target audience isn't even aware of what a snes or nes is so they can get away with remakes and concept recycling. I thought the new super mario bros 2 game was rather fun despite it being nothing new. Even the challenge pack was a load of fun dor dlc. Either or, keep in mind that nintendo's aim is at kiddies, not us grown up kiddies who were alive at the start of it all.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Oct 16, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> BINGO!
> 
> The reason why you feel that Nintendo is lame and a shell of its former self is because you're not the target audience anymore. Their new target audience isn't even aware of what a snes or nes is so they can get away with remakes and concept recycling. I thought the new super mario bros 2 game was rather fun despite it being nothing new. Even the challenge pack was a load of fun dor dlc. Either or, keep in mind that nintendo's aim is at kiddies, not us grown up kiddies who were alive at the start of it all.



I don't know if it is so much that, since there are also family oriented titles which helped sell a lot of units. While I can understand to a point about rehash and I'd like to see new properties of characters, Nintendo reminds me that games are supposed to be fun. They are supposed to help you wind down from a day of frustration. So much times spent on games and getting an aggressive and dour attitude about something that is supposed to be fun? That is why I laugh at the term hardcore gamer. It is such an oxymoron. 

It is because many come off as the most jaded people for something that is supposed to be a pastime.

That is not to say I don't have issues with gaming companies. But a lot of the time I end up not viewing a lot of threads when it involves more bitching about video games instead of having fun.

When I played Mario it was fun and you would share tips on how to do certain tricks. You laughed when you messed up you'd lean about when playing because you were so involved. Sure sometimes they could be frustrating but I don't recall someone berating another Mario player for Super Mario Brothers for being new. You just taught them the tricks.


----------



## Toshabi (Oct 17, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> I don't know if it is so much that, since there are also family oriented titles which helped sell a lot of units. While I can understand to a point about rehash and I'd like to see new properties of characters, Nintendo reminds me that games are supposed to be fun. They are supposed to help you wind down from a day of frustration. So much times spent on games and getting an aggressive and dour attitude about something that is supposed to be fun? That is why I laugh at the term hardcore gamer. It is such an oxymoron.
> 
> It is because many come off as the most jaded people for something that is supposed to be a pastime.
> 
> ...



Hey, I'm a sadist. I love it when my games treat me rough.


Either or, I do see eye to eye with you on that matter. Casual games usually have the most laughs and good times attached to em. Though, beating prepare to die edition of Dark Souls is as rewarding as wiping your ass with silk. :V


----------



## Judge Spear (Oct 17, 2012)

Digitalpotato said:


> Even then if tha'ts the worst you played, then you're quite fortunate you haven't had to suffer from the same shit we did.



Perhaps, but still, I find it very bad. All I'm saying. But, I haven't played too much in since 2000 either. I'm extremely picky.  Probably only played about 400 games in the past 12 years. I can give the game it's credit in a few areas, like Koloktos and the desert mechanics, but everything else just...brought it way way down for me.



Stratadrake said:


> And Arshes Nei explained that for you.



So opinions CAN be wrong. Got it. I'll enjoy everything now to avoid breaking this new rule. 

Anyway, that was the one complaint I never had when the game was announced. The art style. A lot of people were telling me it was awful and while I think the actual drawn art is better (I dunno, characters looked way better on paper/computer to me) than the models it never bothered me. I do feel they lost detail when put in game, but that could just be the cel shading.



Plantar said:


> If you want a hard game, play Dragon Warrior III. The difficulty curve will kill ya. :J



Oh my fuck, Dragon Quest. I played 8 and the ones on the DS. I haven't played the NES versions, but yeah those are some pretty tough games. I just fucking quit DQ8 though. When you get the ship...the game just breaks. Great game though.


----------



## Stratelier (Oct 17, 2012)

XoPachi said:


> So opinions CAN be wrong. Got it. I'll enjoy everything now to avoid breaking this new rule.


No no no.  You're phrasing your opinions so strongly and broadly and as-if-it-were-objective-fact-ly that you're practically begging people to disprove you.

The difference between saying "I hated this game" and "this game is a piece of shit" is who you're blaming:  The former is an opinion that you alone are responsible for; the latter you're phrasing like a fact (and unless the game happens to be brown, mushy, and attracting flies then it's certainly not).



XoPachi said:


> I do feel they lost detail when put in game, but that could just be the cel shading.


Level of detail is a balance of sorts.  If you try to make it look too 'real' then it comes out looking uncanny when the rest of the production (animations, lighting, etc.) don't sync up (and it's usually the animations).



> Oh my fuck, Dragon Quest. I played 8 and the ones on the DS. I haven't played the NES versions, but yeah those are some pretty tough games. I just fucking quit DQ8 though. When you get the ship...the game just breaks. Great game though.


The pirate ship, right?  I noticed that about halfway through bosses start getting two actions per turn instead of one.  Really notches ups the difficulty in boss battles (though of course how you prep your party for it also makes a difference).  The battle against Empyrea, she was hitting my guys so damn hard I really thought it might be one of those hopeless boss fights (but I kept fighting just in case).  So I don't know what you mean by "breaks" if you can't describe it in more specific details.

To be fair, DQ8's save system is a bit antiquated (no save points before bosses?  Where's a church priest when you need one?) but you do get the consolation that if you're defeated, you get revived at the last church and then you can save your game, so you don't actually lose all that time spent exploring/level-grinding in the dungeons (which IS precisely what would happen back in the 8-bit era).  How many times in an 8-bit RPG did you realize you're approaching a boss room, but decide to turn back because you want to save all your progress first?  Seriously, those days were hard with a capital N:  You essentially had to pack twice as much supplies as today because you needed not only enough to get a four-member party _down_ there, but to get a one- or two- survivor party back _out_ of there (no such thing as a "get out of dungeon free" card in those days!) .

Come to think of it, that moment in original FF1 where you realize that upgrading a Red/White Mage to Red/White Wizard means you can purchase the "Exit" spell was a gamechanger, because then you only have to concentrate on keeping them alive and with 1 spell point so they can get you out of there.  No trudging backwards through the dungeon fleeing from an encounter every 20 steps because you're simply too battered to continue on.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 18, 2012)

Toshabi said:


> BINGO!
> 
> The reason why you feel that Nintendo is lame and a shell of its former self is because you're not the target audience anymore. Their new target audience isn't even aware of what a snes or nes is so they can get away with remakes and concept recycling. I thought the new super mario bros 2 game was rather fun despite it being nothing new. Even the challenge pack was a load of fun dor dlc. Either or, keep in mind that nintendo's aim is at kiddies, not us grown up kiddies who were alive at the start of it all.



Well, they've always aimed at everyone. Problem is, people seem to have this opinion that "E" means "For grandmas and babies and Grandmas and Babies *ONLY*!" 
They become unable to look past the stuff and notice the stuff that kids aren't likely to do. I see people whine about how easy Kirby's Epic Yarn was yet they didn't do all the challenges. Or people whining about how easy WoW's raiding was, yet they don't have the achievements saying they did the heroic raids. 
Meanwhile they praise Dark Souls for being hard...main difference? Dark Souls _spoonfeeds you_ the challenge by outright saying "Here it is". You don't have to consciously _choose_ to do it. In my opinion, you can't say a game is "too easy" if you aren't beating it on the hardest modes made _specifically_ for challenge-gamers. It's like those guys who bitch at a game for being too easy only to find that they were playing it on the easiest setting. 

I still find it kind of silly how many gamers bitch about being spoonfed plot and challenge, yet when it's up to the gamers to find it out themselves, proceed to skip over it and then bitch about the plot making no sense or how "Easy" the game is because they rushed to the end and declared themselves "done". 

And at the same time, Challenge-gamers absolutely _fail_ to understand that not everyone wants to play a game and feel challenged. If I had a long day at work or school, the absolute _last_ thing I want to do is do something that'll have me raging at the computer. Like what Arshes Nei said right there....




> ...Nintendo reminds me that games are supposed to be fun. They are supposed to help you wind down from a day of frustration. So much times spent on games and getting an aggressive and dour attitude about something that is supposed to be fun? That is why I laugh at the term hardcore gamer. It is such an oxymoron.



Exactly. Maybe some of us don't want to be cussing at a computer in frustration as we die a million times. I don't wanna play a game like DotA 2 if I'm about to murder someone in a fit of rage...I wanna play something cathartic like a beat-em-up or something calming like Where's My Water.


----------

