Zero Punctuation: Left 4 Dead 2 & New Super Mario Bros Wii

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NEXT
 

Mazty:
snip

I'm saying this with a tentative expectation that you'll understand that, as I am using numbers here, I am responding to what you said with the corresponding number. 'Kay. Fingers crossed...

1)I used films because that's what you used as an example, when you stated that old films are inherently inferior. You also hinted that tech is more important to a film than acting. No I won't quote it. If you can type, I'm fairly certain you can read. If films are not a worthy parallel for this argument, then why did you draw exactly that parallel? I humbly submit that in literature, in painting, in movies and television (see above exception), in music and in video games, the age of the work of art has absolutely nothing to do with its value. If a game were made for a certain system that couldn't quite handle it, or the designers rushed the game and it turned out super buggy (see Tomb Raider, again, above), then that would be an exception. Your notion that things lose their value with age and cease to be "good" shows your immaturity and lack of relatability to the overwhelming majority of the world. Y'know, us preppies who have no taste.
2)You once again seem to have forgotten the words that just left your mouth, mr. argument-switcher. Those weren't images and BS, they were the pretty colors and juvenile sound effects that you imagine entertain idiots like myself and all the other people you've insulted on this thread. That is what cavemen such as myself refer to as "humor." And I will not continue debating who is the troll here, Mr. Herman. I'm only debating one person at present and I'm having fun whenever he goes into a curse-filled tirade or attacks people as juvenile or stupid when they dare to disagree with his vast 21 years of wisdom.

) Why is a 2D mario such a great idea when YOU SAY it does nothing new? Like I said more than 24 hours ago, read up to previous responses to YOUR POSTS, I've already forgotten some of the names I've given you, and I've already answered this question.
) I also won't argue the reason why people are playing the game, which again I feel is another one of your childish games. You've been answered, Mr. Herman. You can troll at everyone, then say things like "you screamed troll!" but the answer won't change. No matter how many times you insult people and then accuse them of personal attacks, they will not tell you another reason they like a game that you do not understand. And look, I get it. You're over the whole Mario thing and you don't get people who aren't. I don't get bisexuality, but I don't go around telling bisexuals they're idiots or juvenile or demand they tell me why they like it. Perhaps you should not either.

Go ahead, little spin-meister, do your thing. Spin away...

He's back! That was a great review and I look forward to many more.

"The Girl" should have been Erykah Badu.

Mazty:

Bilbo536:

Mazty:

Bryy:

snip.

I think it can simply be summed up by if a PS1 game was never released, say GT2, Driver, MGS1, and were a week from now, no one would buy them, or the sales would be significantly lower than they were from being released back during the peak of the PS1. Why is that?
As for old cars, its for nostalgia, or the looks of the car. It won't be for performance or how the car handles.

I figured I'd throw in a little spiel here too. They did in fact release games in such a manner, such as Ocarina of Time: Master Quest for the Gamecube. Even though the controls and graphics remained the same, the dungeons were remastered to present new and difficult challenges, which compelled myself, and many others I'm sure, to give this new challenge a try. Were they to release Majora's Mask: Master Quest tomorrow, it'd be on my christmas list in a heartbeat.

Ah though as you say, it'd be a new challenge which is very true. SMB wii with similar levels to the SNES version I don't find challenging, hence why I think its a pointless game, and why I find it hard to understand how people can enjoy a game with no challenge.

But it does present challenge. It is actually a very very hard game, by the standards of not only classic NES Mario Games, but of most modern games. It sounds to me as though you have not yet played New Super Mario Bros, yet are attempting to sound as though you can give an credible critique of the game.

Mazty, are you for real? You're a troll, right?

iDayman:

Mazty:

1)Films are different as it is a completely different medium to games.
2)Images and BS? Go troll somewhere else please, or grow up, and present an argument which doesn't consist of personal attacks and avoiding what I've asked you - Why are PS1 games mostly crap when they established a lot of genres? Why is a 2D Mario such a great idea when I'd say the game does nothing new, and does not represent a next gen game, nor 15 years worth of development, but instead just nostalgia and people loving it because they want to, rather than on its merits.

WOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSHHHHHHH!

...Did you hear that? You've probably been hearing that alot these last couple pages.

Go back and reread everything that has been said, slowly, not taking immediate offense to every little thing that seems to disagree with you before rushing to the bottom of the page and angrily typing "Personal attacks and blah blah troll, ignore what people are saying while blathering on with contradictory arguments", think about whats been said, figure out what your REALLY trying to argue, and come back.

Maybe then we can have a *big kid* discussion.

Amazing that when the answer is apparently so clear, you & many other people say "Look back and read" instead of actually saying what it is that makes a game, which hardly shows 15 years of a developing industry, such a great and amazing game. Then again I think the problem may be that I just hoped people grew out of bright colours & childish games by the time they hit puberty.

Ienjoygames:

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:
Whatever Mazty, if you don't like old games, well fine. That's you. I don't have time to argue around here anymore.
Super Mario Land is 2D eyecandy for me, same as for other people. You might think it looks like crap, I don't.

Megaman 9 was a huge success, and Megman 10 will be released in a few month. It seems like people still enjoy good "old" games after all.

I enjoy a good challenge without being hindered by archaic controls and shoddy graphics. Plus, great response....."Whatevar, I still likez them", not that you totally avoided answering my question...

I've already answered your questions a several times, and it seems like you still don't get it. And I still don't get why you got such a hard time on old games. What's your problem? If you're having problem with "archaic" controls, well then you're just playing the wrong games. Your loss. Oh, and if you want great controls then you should really try out the Megaman series, with great control and lovely 8-bit graphics. As I said before, people still want more of those games, I'm sure Megaman 10 will be a huge success.

Oh and yes, I "likez" them very much. After all, they're good games, even if they're old.

See, you are ignoring the idea that as games and the industry develops, so should people's expectation. If this wasn't true, then every game should be getting 10/10, as MW2 is better than Doom etc.

No I don't ignore it, I enjoy it as much as everyone else does. But still, that doesn't mean you give the middlefinger to old games.

Because? If old games are "Just as good now as they were then", then how come new games, even the sh*t ones, aren't all getting 10/10? Explain that one please.

funguy2121:

Mazty:
snip

I'm saying this with a tentative expectation that you'll understand that, as I am using numbers here, I am responding to what you said with the corresponding number. 'Kay. Fingers crossed...

1)I used films because that's what you used as an example, when you stated that old films are inherently inferior. You also hinted that tech is more important to a film than acting. No I won't quote it. If you can type, I'm fairly certain you can read. If films are not a worthy parallel for this argument, then why did you draw exactly that parallel? I humbly submit that in literature, in painting, in movies and television (see above exception), in music and in video games, the age of the work of art has absolutely nothing to do with its value. If a game were made for a certain system that couldn't quite handle it, or the designers rushed the game and it turned out super buggy (see Tomb Raider, again, above), then that would be an exception. Your notion that things lose their value with age and cease to be "good" shows your immaturity and lack of relatability to the overwhelming majority of the world. Y'know, us preppies who have no taste.
2)You once again seem to have forgotten the words that just left your mouth, mr. argument-switcher. Those weren't images and BS, they were the pretty colors and juvenile sound effects that you imagine entertain idiots like myself and all the other people you've insulted on this thread. That is what cavemen such as myself refer to as "humor." And I will not continue debating who is the troll here, Mr. Herman. I'm only debating one person at present and I'm having fun whenever he goes into a curse-filled tirade or attacks people as juvenile or stupid when they dare to disagree with his vast 21 years of wisdom.

) Why is a 2D mario such a great idea when YOU SAY it does nothing new? Like I said more than 24 hours ago, read up to previous responses to YOUR POSTS, I've already forgotten some of the names I've given you, and I've already answered this question.
) I also won't argue the reason why people are playing the game, which again I feel is another one of your childish games. You've been answered, Mr. Herman. You can troll at everyone, then say things like "you screamed troll!" but the answer won't change. No matter how many times you insult people and then accuse them of personal attacks, they will not tell you another reason they like a game that you do not understand. And look, I get it. You're over the whole Mario thing and you don't get people who aren't. I don't get bisexuality, but I don't go around telling bisexuals they're idiots or juvenile or demand they tell me why they like it. Perhaps you should not either.

Go ahead, little spin-meister, do your thing. Spin away...

1)No I did not imply tech is important in films. Keep with what I've been saying about games & films separate, and don't try to digress. Yes I made a loose comparison, but essentially it was pretty stupid as games & films are a vastly different medium.
2)Curse filed tirade? Whatever, but I'm pretty sure if you look at your posts, they digress and avoid answering questions directly so badly, it's either the mark of a troll, or you're just having probs saying why a 2D Mario is so good in this day and age when you can just simply play the SNES version.
3)Why haven't you, yes, you yourself answered the question? Why do you leave it for other people to do, when I'd say none have done it well because they come out with half hearted excuses such as "Old is good", which defeats the point of the industy, or "It's a bridging game" which is just a bizarre concept etc.
4)Mr. Herman, Mazzzzztiuiieee etc. What do you expect to get by resorting to literal name calling? It's just juvenile, and that you can't deny.
5)If you can't explain why you like something such as a game, then you aren't trying hard enough. I can explain why I like or dislike every game I have played, so why is it so hard in this instance, unless there is of course that doubt in the back of your mind telling you you may not be enjoying it as much as you tell yourself you are...Just a thought.

Ramset:
Mazty, are you for real? You're a troll, right?

If it makes you feel better, sure, whatever, I'll also be Santa if you want to believe that too.

Ok let me ask you this for the guys who believe valve is ripping you off with selling you a "expansion pack". Do you guys buy ANY sequel to any series of games, if so then do NOT complain about valve. EA and Activision and Nintendo all do this, but NO ONE I repeat NO ONE complain about this as much as Valve for making Left4Dead 2. EA release sports games every year that COULD have dlc updates for stat rosters, and they are starting to rival Activision in the rhythm games that have starting flooding the market (Band Hero, Lego Rock Band really?) all those songs dlc unless they did a redoing of the engine it uses. To people who owned MW and then bought MW2 or owned Assassins Creed only to buy it's squeal, are getting as ripped off as valve. You people sicken me, omg valve is doing what every company has been doing but since two people made a group about it and I am a sheep I think they are evil also. Also you shouldn't listen to Yahtzee for real game reviews(or any reviewer), he is funny but he stresses things wrong with the game WWAAYYY to much. You fans are just sheep's who listen for what he says is good or bad. Stop listening to these reviewers as fact, their thought on the game in question is THEIR thought not yours. No one can decided that a game is good or bad but yourself. I missed out on a lot of great games I liked because reviewers who claim it's not a good game. They just pass what they thought about the game to you, but you have to make the ultimate choice(I like to compare my thoughts with other reviewers).

Edit:Also I think a lot of the valve hate is from the fact they haven't made Half Life 2:EP3.

A Pious Cultist:

Aulwynd:
I can't agree any more. L4D2 is just an L4D expansion, nothing more. Its just a a bunch of new maps, a few useless melee weapons and thats it. And about New Super Mario Bross Wii, well, its a ripoff from New Super Mario bross DS wich is a ripoff from Super Mario 3, so its not a big surprise that it dont have anything new(as the title says, btw)

Yes. Just more plot, new characters, new settings, new gameplay mechanics, new game modes, new weapon types, new weapons, new infected, new infected behaviour, new gore system, new uncommon infected, new weather effects, new use of variations in pathing, updated graphics, updated older game mechanics, a few different atmospheres for the various campaigns, wait... they arn't that similar after all.

Yeah, I was unimpressed with the demo, yeah I see that the CORE CORE CORE gameplay is the same. But what more do you want? Don't 99.9% of all sequals share the same gameplay mechanics?
Why not ask for Halo 2 and 3 to be an expansion to Halo 1? After all all it is is new graphics, enemies, plot, maps, weapons and characters?
Left 4 Dead 2 has so many new additions that it would not work as DLC since anyone who didn't have it would be pretty much unable to play with people who do.

1. there is no such thing as new charecters as they are simply skins.
2. weapons are all basically the same, what is the point with the silencer anyways?
3. settings are very basic. dur, they have to have new areas.
4. the weather effects are minimal, and only used in one portion of a level.
5. new infected are the only intruiging thing, but as they ARE the only unique thing then it boils down to...an expansion
6. there are no new mechanics, the undead still haul ass righttowards nice meaty people and try to nom on them

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:
Whatever Mazty, if you don't like old games, well fine. That's you. I don't have time to argue around here anymore.
Super Mario Land is 2D eyecandy for me, same as for other people. You might think it looks like crap, I don't.

Megaman 9 was a huge success, and Megman 10 will be released in a few month. It seems like people still enjoy good "old" games after all.

I enjoy a good challenge without being hindered by archaic controls and shoddy graphics. Plus, great response....."Whatevar, I still likez them", not that you totally avoided answering my question...

I've already answered your questions a several times, and it seems like you still don't get it. And I still don't get why you got such a hard time on old games. What's your problem? If you're having problem with "archaic" controls, well then you're just playing the wrong games. Your loss. Oh, and if you want great controls then you should really try out the Megaman series, with great control and lovely 8-bit graphics. As I said before, people still want more of those games, I'm sure Megaman 10 will be a huge success.

Oh and yes, I "likez" them very much. After all, they're good games, even if they're old.

See, you are ignoring the idea that as games and the industry develops, so should people's expectation. If this wasn't true, then every game should be getting 10/10, as MW2 is better than Doom etc.

No I don't ignore it, I enjoy it as much as everyone else does. But still, that doesn't mean you give the middlefinger to old games.

Because? If old games are "Just as good now as they were then", then how come new games, even the sh*t ones, aren't all getting 10/10? Explain that one please.

Probably because they're not living up to todays expectations. As with more and new technology, (Developers) you have much more responsibility to use it right.

And as I said before, just because we got better technology today, doesn't mean good old games automatically turn into bad games.

Ienjoygames:

Mazty:
I enjoy a good challenge without being hindered by archaic controls and shoddy graphics. Plus, great response....."Whatevar, I still likez them", not that you totally avoided answering my question...

I've already answered your questions a several times, and it seems like you still don't get it. And I still don't get why you got such a hard time on old games. What's your problem? If you're having problem with "archaic" controls, well then you're just playing the wrong games. Your loss. Oh, and if you want great controls then you should really try out the Megaman series, with great control and lovely 8-bit graphics. As I said before, people still want more of those games, I'm sure Megaman 10 will be a huge success.

It seems you don't give a fuck anyways.
What's the word for people like you? Narrow-minded person? Smallminded? Fanatic? ...

Mazty:

1)No I did not imply tech is important in films. Keep with what I've been saying about games & films separate, and don't try to digress. Yes I made a loose comparison, but essentially it was pretty stupid as games & films are a vastly different medium.
2)Curse filed tirade? Whatever, but I'm pretty sure if you look at your posts, they digress and avoid answering questions directly so badly, it's either the mark of a troll, or you're just having probs saying why a 2D Mario is so good in this day and age when you can just simply play the SNES version.
3)Why haven't you, yes, you yourself answered the question? Why do you leave it for other people to do, when I'd say none have done it well because they come out with half hearted excuses such as "Old is good", which defeats the point of the industy, or "It's a bridging game" which is just a bizarre concept etc.
4)Mr. Herman, Mazzzzztiuiieee etc. What do you expect to get by resorting to literal name calling? It's just juvenile, and that you can't deny.
5)If you can't explain why you like something such as a game, then you aren't trying hard enough. I can explain why I like or dislike every game I have played, so why is it so hard in this instance, unless there is of course that doubt in the back of your mind telling you you may not be enjoying it as much as you tell yourself you are...Just a thought.

1)Yes you diddy-did-did. As you just got through telling another person here, you don't want to re-read, you're tired of everybody telling you to read the crazy shit your saying and read our responses, because YOUR QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. I won't quote you, Mr. Switcheroo, because there's a blue bar down there that says 12, 13, 14, 15 and you can simply tag one of those numbers to see where he-said-she-said... and once again, my argument is stupid because I compared games to "film" which was a continuation of a thought YOU started. Odd. You sir, must have extremely short term amnesia. "Vastly different medium?" Really? Do you think that would stand up in court? Care to elaborate, or do you just want to continue couching a flimsy argument in words that, once again, are being misused and aren't nearly as impressive as you imagine. Grow up Mazty, you're 21 now. If you can drink, you can talk like a big boy.
2)Case in point...digress. Please stop using this word 50 times in every post. It does not make you sound smart, it sounds like an 11-year-old trying to sound smart to his parents. I'm being sincere here. I'm trying to help you. The question you obliquely posed to me there, the same question that you claimed has been 30 questions, is how can X be good now even though it was good then. I have certainly answered this question. You will deny it as readily as you will deny every thing you've said on here. How does age affect quality? C'mon Mr. Integrity, I'm asking YOU a question. Give me a reasoned explanation for how an old movie or game is inherently inferior to a new movie or game, and don't try to spin your way out of the comparison, because that's what you said about both (vastly different) mediums.
3) When misquoting someone, it's important to remember not to get their (mis)quotes confused with someone else's. See above.
4)You continue to say, "I know you are but what am I." When I feel less lazy, I'll source Pee-Wee's Playhouse to you. I'll explain the rise and fall of Paul Reubens, celebrity and dirty pervert. Of course, then I'll still have to explain why it's relevant, and you'll just argue like you have a leg to stand on. Sigh...
5)So...if you dislike every game you have played, as you just stated...then what are you doing on the escapist?

But seriously though, my grammatically challenged friend, if I DO like something, then why do I need to defend it? If I can't stand something and run around telling everybody it sucks and they're a mentally retarded nazi pedophile if they like it, then it is incumbent upon ME to explain why it has no merit.

Wow, this is useless. He's not gonna read it anyway. He's just gonna pick a few words out, twist them, and tell me I'm stupid because he read a movie review in Entertainment Weekly that his mother left on the toilet...

Sigh. I surrender, M. You win. I can't talk to you.

funguy2121:

Mazty:

1)No I did not imply tech is important in films. Keep with what I've been saying about games & films separate, and don't try to digress. Yes I made a loose comparison, but essentially it was pretty stupid as games & films are a vastly different medium.
2)Curse filed tirade? Whatever, but I'm pretty sure if you look at your posts, they digress and avoid answering questions directly so badly, it's either the mark of a troll, or you're just having probs saying why a 2D Mario is so good in this day and age when you can just simply play the SNES version.
3)Why haven't you, yes, you yourself answered the question? Why do you leave it for other people to do, when I'd say none have done it well because they come out with half hearted excuses such as "Old is good", which defeats the point of the industy, or "It's a bridging game" which is just a bizarre concept etc.
4)Mr. Herman, Mazzzzztiuiieee etc. What do you expect to get by resorting to literal name calling? It's just juvenile, and that you can't deny.
5)If you can't explain why you like something such as a game, then you aren't trying hard enough. I can explain why I like or dislike every game I have played, so why is it so hard in this instance, unless there is of course that doubt in the back of your mind telling you you may not be enjoying it as much as you tell yourself you are...Just a thought.

1)Yes you diddy-did-did. As you just got through telling another person here, you don't want to re-read, you're tired of everybody telling you to read the crazy shit your saying and read our responses, because YOUR QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. I won't quote you, Mr. Switcheroo, because there's a blue bar down there that says 12, 13, 14, 15 and you can simply tag one of those numbers to see where he-said-she-said... and once again, my argument is stupid because I compared games to "film" which was a continuation of a thought YOU started. Odd. You sir, must have extremely short term amnesia. "Vastly different medium?" Really? Do you think that would stand up in court? Care to elaborate, or do you just want to continue couching a flimsy argument in words that, once again, are being misused and aren't nearly as impressive as you imagine. Grow up Mazty, you're 21 now. If you can drink, you can talk like a big boy.
2)Case in point...digress. Please stop using this word 50 times in every post. It does not make you sound smart, it sounds like an 11-year-old trying to sound smart to his parents. I'm being sincere here. I'm trying to help you. The question you obliquely posed to me there, the same question that you claimed has been 30 questions, is how can X be good now even though it was good then. I have certainly answered this question. You will deny it as readily as you will deny every thing you've said on here. How does age affect quality? C'mon Mr. Integrity, I'm asking YOU a question. Give me a reasoned explanation for how an old movie or game is inherently inferior to a new movie or game, and don't try to spin your way out of the comparison, because that's what you said about both (vastly different) mediums.
3) When misquoting someone, it's important to remember not to get their (mis)quotes confused with someone else's. See above.
4)You continue to say, "I know you are but what am I." When I feel less lazy, I'll source Pee-Wee's Playhouse to you. I'll explain the rise and fall of Paul Reubens, celebrity and dirty pervert. Of course, then I'll still have to explain why it's relevant, and you'll just argue like you have a leg to stand on. Sigh...
5)So...if you dislike every game you have played, as you just stated...then what are you doing on the escapist?

But seriously though, my grammatically challenged friend, if I DO like something, then why do I need to defend it? If I can't stand something and run around telling everybody it sucks and they're a mentally retarded nazi pedophile if they like it, then it is incumbent upon ME to explain why it has no merit.

Wow, this is useless. He's not gonna read it anyway. He's just gonna pick a few words out, twist them, and tell me I'm stupid because he read a movie review in Entertainment Weekly that his mother left on the toilet...

Sigh. I surrender, M. You win. I can't talk to you.

You are possibly the most immature & annoying person I have had the bad luck to encoutner on the internet
1)Yes I did start the comparison with film, but if you just take a minute to read what I said (It's in the quote at the top FFS), I said that it was only a loose comparison and on reflection not a great one as films & games are so different. Why? Because one is to do with acting, script & two hours of pure visual entertainment. THe other is a 6-10+hour game where the player has interact with a virtual world. Do you really think films like American Beauty or Meet Joe Black could work as games? Stupid question, which you could have figured out for yourself if you spent less time ranting & raving and more time thinking. I never said films are better due to technology, I said the main element was time/development of the industry, and that should be true for games. How the F**K did you manage to right so much on next to nothing?! If you are going to be rude, please be concise as well.
2)Oh sorry you're one of those people who feel out of place using the correct grammar. What's the different between digress and "going off topic"? Really? And ironically, another digression from you. Smooth. You have not answered why a 2D Mario is good, you replies have gone like this:
Me:I think SMB Wii is an appalling idea and problematic to the gaming industry
You: No, it's a great idea
Me: Why is it a great idea?
You: I've already answered that, re-read my replies
Me:No you haven't....Why is it such a good idea?
You: Re-read!

At no point have you ever said why a 2D Mario was a good idea. All you've offered so far is that many other companies are churning out game re-treads. That's a fact, not an explanation. If you are seriously sad enough to pretend you have given a good reason when you know you haven't, you've a few issues.
As I have shown, a film =/=game, so shouldn't really be compared. As for games, old games are generally inferior to newer games because the technical limitations makes gameplay and immersion worse. Take Gran Turismo or Doom. Poor graphics, bad controls, and for what they were trying to do, it now can be done much better. As for SMB Wii, does it show 15 years of improvements? And if for some reason you want some simple 2D'ing platformer, why then not just buy SMB of VC? Hence why the game is a disgrace because, like the Wii, it's pretty much just a gimmick.
3)Wow, you avoided answering the question again. Grow up kid, you really must have something spectacular going on in your head if you think your behaviours the norm.
4)Lolwut? I'm not name calling, you literally are. Going to grow up any time soon? (I think we can both agree name calling is immature, so I have a fair & valid point there)
5)"I can explain why I like or dislike every game I have played" =/= hating every game I've played. Maybe if I said "I can explain my liking or dislike for any & every game I have played" that'll be clearer.

Okay, now you're falling back to the "Oops I actually don't know why I like it, so I'll say I don't have to defend it". This would have been so much shorter and easier if you have just said why you like the game instead of avoiding the question like the plague.
Anyway, I have the inkling from your avatar that if I saw you on the street, you'd just be that kind of person I'm glad I'm not, so I don't know why I'm trying to have a rational a mature discussion with you as you set out to be irrational/trollish from the start.

Mazty:
snip snip troll flame and snip

1-When your argument failed, you then re-described your argument as a "loose" one (based upon nothing) and declared it a stupid comparison, only after, of course, you conveniently forgot that you went to that comparison in the first place and called me stupid for following you there. I never stated anything about comparing a movie to a game. I was talking about analogies and how, according to you, in both mediums old=shit, new=your wife is taking lapdance lessons. And while I'm very verbose, I cannot tell you how I "right" so much.
2-...ya know what, I'm ready to drop the format.

I do not have to explain to you why I like something that you lack a fundamental understanding of. For me to even effectively debate you, you have to explain why you think it sucks. I'm not the first person on here to point out that you don't seem to even have seen footage of the game, let alone played it. You're prejudging, and whether it's based on a dogged fanboy loyalty to certain brands or a high-and-mighty elitism borne of your identification with certain snooty critics (you did quote Yatzee verbatim without crediting the author a few minutes ago, after all - thief), the fact remains that you are passionately, emotionally arguing about the value of a certain video game. This is where I draw the distinction between geek and nerd. Geeks may like brainy stuff, but nerds will argue over which Pokemon game was truer to the canon. See the difference? I would never, ever tell anyone how friggin' worthless they were because of their opinion of a Mario game. I'm not sure why you've chosen to do exactly that a number of times, BUT I DIGRESS.

Your arguments are based upon loosely connected and constantly shifting points. There is no consistency, except that your tastes do not include Mario. Once again, this is subjective.

funguy2121:

Mazty:
snip snip troll flame and snip

1-When your argument failed, you then re-described your argument as a "loose" one (based upon nothing) and declared it a stupid comparison, only after, of course, you conveniently forgot that you went to that comparison in the first place and called me stupid for following you there. I never stated anything about comparing a movie to a game. I was talking about analogies and how, according to you, in both mediums old=shit, new=your wife is taking lapdance lessons. And while I'm very verbose, I cannot tell you how I "right" so much.
2-...ya know what, I'm ready to drop the format.

I do not have to explain to you why I like something that you lack a fundamental understanding of. For me to even effectively debate you, you have to explain why you think it sucks. I'm not the first person on here to point out that you don't seem to even have seen footage of the game, let alone played it. You're prejudging, and whether it's based on a dogged fanboy loyalty to certain brands or a high-and-mighty elitism borne of your identification with certain snooty critics (you did quote Yatzee verbatim without crediting the author a few minutes ago, after all - thief), the fact remains that you are passionately, emotionally arguing about the value of a certain video game. This is where I draw the distinction between geek and nerd. Geeks may like brainy stuff, but nerds will argue over which Pokemon game was truer to the canon. See the difference? I would never, ever tell anyone how friggin' worthless they were because of their opinion of a Mario game. I'm not sure why you've chosen to do exactly that a number of times, BUT I DIGRESS.

Your arguments are based upon loosely connected and constantly shifting points. There is no consistency, except that your tastes do not include Mario. Once again, this is subjective.

Actually I had the decency to say that my initial comparison of films and games may have looked okay on the outset, but after looking at it further, it was pretty retarded of myself.
Do you know who else uses the argument "I don't have to defend my beliefs, prove why they are wrong"? The Flat Earth Society, I sh*t you not. In otherwords, it's a weak excuse for someone who can't actually explain what they think. Like all this arguing and name calling could have been stopped if you had just said "Actually I like SMB Wii because of "X" & "Y", and I think it is definitely worth a purchase, and shows 15 years worth of industry improvements from one of the largest gaming companies because of "Z"". I cannot figure out "X", "Y" & "Z", hence why I think the game's a bad joke. Of course if someone could say what they were, then wonderful, I'd be happy to change my view of the game. But no, instead there comes the usual plethora of excuses such as "It's a bridging game", "It's good because it's like a good game" (Not in the least ambiguous) etc. For such an apparently great game, why are people finding it so hard to word/write logical reasons for why it's so great?
As for Geeks vs Nerds. The reason I do this is because I enjoy games. Though I have noticed this generation a massive lack of quality and it's down to you, joe average gamer, who doesn't insist on quality, but goes "It'll do" and then warps that to "BEST GAME EVAR!". I'm, calling it now but at the rate that gamers are swallowing up average at best games by the truck load, console gaming will be lucky to be alive in 2 generations. Plus, if I'm going to end up in a managerial position overlooking joe average, I'd like to try and think they can be talked into rational thinking, but alas, I don't think so.
Plus I base my opinion of you on the way you write, the content of what you write, and your avatar. Usually I get judgements of people spot on as it is, can't see why a nice, respectable person would write like a douche and vice-versa.

Mazty:

Actually I had the decency to say that my initial comparison of films and games may have looked okay on the outset, but after looking at it further, it was pretty retarded of myself.
Do you know who else uses the argument "I don't have to defend my beliefs, prove why they are wrong"? The Flat Earth Society, I sh*t you not. In otherwords, it's a weak excuse for someone who can't actually explain what they think. Like all this arguing and name calling could have been stopped if you had just said "Actually I like SMB Wii because of "X" & "Y", and I think it is definitely worth a purchase, and shows 15 years worth of industry improvements from one of the largest gaming companies because of "Z"". I cannot figure out "X", "Y" & "Z", hence why I think the game's a bad joke. Of course if someone could say what they were, then wonderful, I'd be happy to change my view of the game. But no, instead there comes the usual plethora of excuses such as "It's a bridging game", "It's good because it's like a good game" (Not in the least ambiguous) etc. For such an apparently great game, why are people finding it so hard to word/write logical reasons for why it's so great?
As for Geeks vs Nerds. The reason I do this is because I enjoy games. THOUGH I HAVE NOTICED IN THIS GENERATION A MASSIVE LACK OF QUALITY and it's down to you, joe average gamer, who doesn't insist on quality, but goes "It'll do" and then warps that to "BEST GAME EVAR!". I'm, calling it now but at the rate that gamers are swallowing up average at best games by the truck load, console gaming will be lucky to be alive in 2 generations. Plus, if I'm going to end up in a managerial position overlooking joe average, I'd like to try and think they can be talked into rational thinking, but alas, I don't think so.
Plus I base my opinion of you on the way you write, the content of what you write, and your avatar. Usually I get judgements of people spot on as it is, can't see why a nice, respectable person would write like a douche and vice-versa.

Okay puppet master, I will dance on your strings. Why do I think the new Mario was a good idea, once again? Because people have been starving for old school 2D Mario since the release of SMWorld over 15 years ago. There hasn't been a 2D side-scrolling platformer since then, and along comes a game that you haven't played that's very challenging and also a fun 4-player experience. This comes from a person who has all the previous Marios on his virtual console; it was a fun trip down memory lane but, with no surprises, it wasn't nearly as fun as the first time. So now I'm offered a brand new experience. The levels are not identical to any previous Mario game, as you have claimed, and since you love forcing me to repeat myself, this is a very challenging game. Now, as you have represented yourself as a heroic, noble sage I will take you up on your word and you must now magically begin to agree with me, as you have stated you would.

Freedom of speech goes both ways, btw. No one is forcing me to defend my beliefs to you and see, that's a damned good thing for you since you believe quality is a perishable commodity. You can compare me to the Flat Earth Society, I can compare you to the people who think Global Warming is a myth or the people who don't understand subjectivity or the art of filmmaking/game-making but in the end, it's a useless gesture. I feel no need whatsoever to prove that Mario shows 15 years worth of improvements (stop using Yatzee arguments and come up with your own please, thief). You obviously missed the point Nintendo was making although they've made it several times before. And no, I will not explain what that point is, so you better ready that argument that I lack the ability to explain it...

Oh, plethora. Plethora, cornucopia, peccadillo. I've hated these words since the first time I heard them. Who was the dumb blonde on The View before they brought in the arch-conservative, the one the SNL folks always made fun of for being a bimbo? She played herself in a sketch where she got to use a bunch of big words to make her appear as a smart, tough young woman, and plethora and peccadillo were amongst the words that made me wince. The end result? She looked stupid.

Y'know back there where I said that your arguments were constantly shifting? Thanks for proving my point. I don't know how to bold-face in HTML so I'll do the all-caps treatment for ya.

Finally, Mr. Herman, you yourself have still yet to qualify how you think that quality atrophies over time, or how the Wii or Nintendo or their mascots are "destroying" gaming. A point I was trying to make before you provided so much fun trying to compare me to a toddler was that the PSOne was a very inept system with an overall poor catalogue of games but a few gems that widened the overall audience of gaming, which made the industry more mainstream and brought in a lot of money, which brought in a lot more R&D and a lot more developers and publishers...end result: it vastly improved gaming. Sound familiar? It's called the Wii.
And one last question for you. How is it that you view Nintendo as this greedy corporation that needs to be stopped (I agree with the first part), when their one of their competitors makes the worst computer operating systems imaginable and fixes their problems with shit advertising, and the other competitor gave you and me and everyone else the finger with an initial $700 price tag?

funguy2121:

Mazty:

Actually I had the decency to say that my initial comparison of films and games may have looked okay on the outset, but after looking at it further, it was pretty retarded of myself.
Do you know who else uses the argument "I don't have to defend my beliefs, prove why they are wrong"? The Flat Earth Society, I sh*t you not. In otherwords, it's a weak excuse for someone who can't actually explain what they think. Like all this arguing and name calling could have been stopped if you had just said "Actually I like SMB Wii because of "X" & "Y", and I think it is definitely worth a purchase, and shows 15 years worth of industry improvements from one of the largest gaming companies because of "Z"". I cannot figure out "X", "Y" & "Z", hence why I think the game's a bad joke. Of course if someone could say what they were, then wonderful, I'd be happy to change my view of the game. But no, instead there comes the usual plethora of excuses such as "It's a bridging game", "It's good because it's like a good game" (Not in the least ambiguous) etc. For such an apparently great game, why are people finding it so hard to word/write logical reasons for why it's so great?
As for Geeks vs Nerds. The reason I do this is because I enjoy games. THOUGH I HAVE NOTICED IN THIS GENERATION A MASSIVE LACK OF QUALITY and it's down to you, joe average gamer, who doesn't insist on quality, but goes "It'll do" and then warps that to "BEST GAME EVAR!". I'm, calling it now but at the rate that gamers are swallowing up average at best games by the truck load, console gaming will be lucky to be alive in 2 generations. Plus, if I'm going to end up in a managerial position overlooking joe average, I'd like to try and think they can be talked into rational thinking, but alas, I don't think so.
Plus I base my opinion of you on the way you write, the content of what you write, and your avatar. Usually I get judgements of people spot on as it is, can't see why a nice, respectable person would write like a douche and vice-versa.

Okay puppet master, I will dance on your strings. Why do I think the new Mario was a good idea, once again? Because people have been starving for old school 2D Mario since the release of SMWorld over 15 years ago. There hasn't been a 2D side-scrolling platformer since then, and along comes a game that you haven't played that's very challenging and also a fun 4-player experience. This comes from a person who has all the previous Marios on his virtual console; it was a fun trip down memory lane but, with no surprises, it wasn't nearly as fun as the first time. So now I'm offered a brand new experience. The levels are not identical to any previous Mario game, as you have claimed, and since you love forcing me to repeat myself, this is a very challenging game. Now, as you have represented yourself as a heroic, noble sage I will take you up on your word and you must now magically begin to agree with me, as you have stated you would.

Freedom of speech goes both ways, btw. No one is forcing me to defend my beliefs to you and see, that's a damned good thing for you since you believe quality is a perishable commodity. You can compare me to the Flat Earth Society, I can compare you to the people who think Global Warming is a myth or the people who don't understand subjectivity or the art of filmmaking/game-making but in the end, it's a useless gesture. I feel no need whatsoever to prove that Mario shows 15 years worth of improvements (stop using Yatzee arguments and come up with your own please, thief). You obviously missed the point Nintendo was making although they've made it several times before. And no, I will not explain what that point is, so you better ready that argument that I lack the ability to explain it...

Oh, plethora. Plethora, cornucopia, peccadillo. I've hated these words since the first time I heard them. Who was the dumb blonde on The View before they brought in the arch-conservative, the one the SNL folks always made fun of for being a bimbo? She played herself in a sketch where she got to use a bunch of big words to make her appear as a smart, tough young woman, and plethora and peccadillo were amongst the words that made me wince. The end result? She looked stupid.

Y'know back there where I said that your arguments were constantly shifting? Thanks for proving my point. I don't know how to bold-face in HTML so I'll do the all-caps treatment for ya.

Finally, Mr. Herman, you yourself have still yet to qualify how you think that quality atrophies over time, or how the Wii or Nintendo or their mascots are "destroying" gaming. A point I was trying to make before you provided so much fun trying to compare me to a toddler was that the PSOne was a very inept system with an overall poor catalogue of games but a few gems that widened the overall audience of gaming, which made the industry more mainstream and brought in a lot of money, which brought in a lot more R&D and a lot more developers and publishers...end result: it vastly improved gaming. Sound familiar? It's called the Wii.
And one last question for you. How is it that you view Nintendo as this greedy corporation that needs to be stopped (I agree with the first part), when their one of their competitors makes the worst computer operating systems imaginable and fixes their problems with shit advertising, and the other competitor gave you and me and everyone else the finger with an initial $700 price tag?

I can't really see any debate about this one as its so obvious.
Within the first paragraph you practically admitted your a fan boy who's revelling in a distant time when 2D was good, you were happy, and nieve - as we all are when we're young.

At the end of the day 2D Mario is dated.
Why?
Because it's bad.
That is why things date. If this was not the case then why is there not a cascade of 2D linear games for sale at 35? Because no other company can rely on its fan boys as much as Nintendo.

TB_Infidel:

I can't really see any debate about this one as its so obvious.
Within the first paragraph you practically admitted your a fan boy who's revelling in a distant time when 2D was good, you were happy, and nieve - as we all are when we're young.

At the end of the day 2D Mario is dated.
Why?
Because it's bad.
That is why things date. If this was not the case then why is there not a cascade of 2D linear games for sale at 35? Because no other company can rely on its fan boys as much as Nintendo.

I don't think I would define fanboy the way that you do. A fanboy is, to me, a person who thinks that their favorite game company/director/anime company can do no wrong. I'm certainly disappointed with a lot of choices that Nintendo has made recently, but as a 29 year old man with a career, social life and literary and musical pursuits, the Wii with its precious few good releases suits me just fine. I do clearly define myself as a lover of retro gaming; the most recent thread I started was about remaking the 8-bit classic Master Blaster.

I can't stand when someone is not willing to see the flaws in the games they love. I, personally, love many games in spite of their imperfections. If you read several pages back, I was debating both extreme sides of this argument with two people on opposite ends of the spectrum. One had the same stance that you and Mazty share, that Mario games are somehow inherently bad simply because the concept is dated, and another took me to task for acknowledging that Nintendo's inclusion of 2 palette-swap Toads was lazy. If you believe that age has anything to do with the quality of a game, then read a few posts up.

This is Nintendo nostalgia b/c Nintendo is the only surviving company (aside from Sega) from the 2D period. Microsoft and Sony got into the game as pseudo-3D was transitioning into 3D, so they're not exactly overflowing with side-scrolling titles to remake.

I'll tell you exactly what I told Mazty: I like something that you don't. It is not incumbent upon me to defend it. If you think it's inherently bad, the burden falls upon you to explain what's wrong with it. Have you played the game?

Edit: Profile check. Did you really have to bring your buddy in here to back you up, Mazty? I was going to tell TBInfidel to read more than one post so he could see your contradictions. It also appears you edited your last post. Where are the barbs about my personality based on my avatar being a bigg'un? I guess you took back the fat hate when you realized Kevin Smith is obese.

funguy2121:

Okay puppet master, I will dance on your strings. Why do I think the new Mario was a good idea, once again? Because people have been starving for old school 2D Mario since the release of SMWorld over 15 years ago. There hasn't been a 2D side-scrolling platformer since then, and along comes a game that you haven't played that's very challenging and also a fun 4-player experience. This comes from a person who has all the previous Marios on his virtual console; it was a fun trip down memory lane but, with no surprises, it wasn't nearly as fun as the first time. So now I'm offered a brand new experience. The levels are not identical to any previous Mario game, as you have claimed, and since you love forcing me to repeat myself, this is a very challenging game. Now, as you have represented yourself as a heroic, noble sage I will take you up on your word and you must now magically begin to agree with me, as you have stated you would.

Freedom of speech goes both ways, btw. No one is forcing me to defend my beliefs to you and see, that's a damned good thing for you since you believe quality is a perishable commodity. You can compare me to the Flat Earth Society, I can compare you to the people who think Global Warming is a myth or the people who don't understand subjectivity or the art of filmmaking/game-making but in the end, it's a useless gesture. I feel no need whatsoever to prove that Mario shows 15 years worth of improvements (stop using Yatzee arguments and come up with your own please, thief). You obviously missed the point Nintendo was making although they've made it several times before. And no, I will not explain what that point is, so you better ready that argument that I lack the ability to explain it...

Oh, plethora. Plethora, cornucopia, peccadillo. I've hated these words since the first time I heard them. Who was the dumb blonde on The View before they brought in the arch-conservative, the one the SNL folks always made fun of for being a bimbo? She played herself in a sketch where she got to use a bunch of big words to make her appear as a smart, tough young woman, and plethora and peccadillo were amongst the words that made me wince. The end result? She looked stupid.

Y'know back there where I said that your arguments were constantly shifting? Thanks for proving my point. I don't know how to bold-face in HTML so I'll do the all-caps treatment for ya.

Finally, Mr. Herman, you yourself have still yet to qualify how you think that quality atrophies over time, or how the Wii or Nintendo or their mascots are "destroying" gaming. A point I was trying to make before you provided so much fun trying to compare me to a toddler was that the PSOne was a very inept system with an overall poor catalogue of games but a few gems that widened the overall audience of gaming, which made the industry more mainstream and brought in a lot of money, which brought in a lot more R&D and a lot more developers and publishers...end result: it vastly improved gaming. Sound familiar? It's called the Wii.
And one last question for you. How is it that you view Nintendo as this greedy corporation that needs to be stopped (I agree with the first part), when their one of their competitors makes the worst computer operating systems imaginable and fixes their problems with shit advertising, and the other competitor gave you and me and everyone else the finger with an initial $700 price tag?

Okay, so your entire point for SMB Wii being a great game is that people have been starved of a 2D platformer?....Well what about VC, and more to the point, that's utterly unsubstantiated, not to mention BS. Braid? Viewtiful Joe? Oh yeah and Little Big Planet. Which all have shown improvement on the 2D platformer without going 3D.
Looking at the SMB Wii Super Skills on Youtube, sure, it's impressive, but hardly very challenging - it's not like S licesence on GT4, or Zones on Wipeout.
No one is making you say why you like SMB Wii, I'm just asking. The real question is why are you getting so worked up over it?
Plethora. Well if it makes you feel any better I'm doing a Bsc at a red brick UK uni, so I'm hardly being pretentious. Not my fault you don't like big words.
Still with the name calling? I see you still haven't grown up. Good to know.
How does a good game from the 1990's become a sh*t game later on? You have to be a special "spechal" to really think differently. Take "Driver". When it came out, it handled well, fairly good graphics, and did the job well. Now in comparison to new games, it looks like sh*t, handles even worse, sounds dire, and is filled with bugs. Technical improvements allow games to become better, as in more accurate physics, more responsive controls and so on. If this wasn't true, then how come pretty much all FPS after 2000 don't get 10/10 when they are all better than Doom, which after having played, is not just piss easy, but also simple level design etc. Essentially on a technical level, the quality of old games becomes lower pretty much every year. If you want to look at it in another way, what does GT2 do that GT4 doesn't do better? Or what does Doom do which another more modern FPS do better? And so on.
The Wii is technically shocking. The remote doesn't even respond in real time. Great. And the CPU etc are pretty weak so don't expect challenging AI as it can't handle it. Simple AI = easy game. Game with no challenge I find is a game with no fun, as what's the point in it?
By the way, the PS1 hardly is comparible to the Wii for quality of titles (Also check metacritic for the Wii vs everything else on quality against quantity):
Gran Turismo 1 - 2, Driver 1 - 2, Final Fantasy 7 - 9, Rainbow 6 Series, Tekken Series, Ridge Racer, Spyro the Dragon Series, King's Feild Series, Rayman Series, Wipeout Series, Resident Evil Series, Crash Bandicoot Series, Tomb Raider Series, Collin McRae Rally, Silent Hill, MGS and many more.
How the f**k has the Wii improved the industry? Games on the console have to be technically limited due to the wii's poor tech specs, and the only innovation seen is pad-fapping in every other game. No, sir, you are living in another world. Walk into a shop and almost every Wii game is a party game or generic platformers, aimed for either young kids or housewives - both having no idea what constitutes as a good game nowadays. What series of game will outlast the motion control gimmick? The only series which looks like it'll have a life span beyond the Wii is No More Heroes. Granted originality has been lacking this generation, but by technically limiting their games, Nintendo just made sure that the only noticeable difference in a generation of games would be the controller. Compare Killzone 1 and 2. Huge difference. Same with other games like Fable and Fable 2, then new game series like Gears of War etc. Back to my point though, the Wii has not improved gaming at all. Though you don't even try to justify that point, and it's obvious why.
Saying Windows is the worst OS possible is just naive. Go. Use linux. Have fun playing games. Though I don't agree with all the hidden extra prices e.g. HDD, wireless adapater (Both MS brand), online sub etc. As for Sony, it's economics. You can't make a brand new technology for bugger all - bluray was just launching and to have released it at a cheaper price would have been too costly for Sony. Yes it sucks, but that's economics.

Maz, B4 I reply to this, why did you use your alternate profile and pretend to be someone else? Or is TBInfidel your twin brother. You both were born on December 22, 1988.

Mazty:
snip

Mazty:
snipped for everyone's sake

You really don't listen, do ya? Did you read more than 20 words?

Reread the first paragraph of what you just posted and think about the inconsistency of your arguments.

You obviously have it in for Nintendo, which is cool; they're a greedy corporation and I don't begrudge you hating on them. They can handle it. Apparently, Sony and Microsoft can't. If I tell you that you win, will you press play on the youtube link and follow its instructions? I guess I have to spell it out for you, since my cavespeak translates poorly into your academic language: I am not aware of anyone who uses Linux on their home computer. I was referring to using a PC vs. using a Mac. Why don't you start a thread that says "vista rules," if it's so great? Also, I don't know if you know this but the average gamer (that's me!) doesn't buy a video game system to buy an overrated, overpriced DVD format that will possibly go the way of the beta max very soon. Aw, shit, now I'm gonna have to explain beta max!

You win!

But seriously, why did you bring an alterego in here with your exact same birthdate, location and join-date to chastise me? "Oh no, now fake people are attacking me too!" I've had fun with this little spat but as you can see, the thread is now torpedo'd. Congratulations. See, it stops being fun for everyone else after a while. I'm gonna tell you something that I don't just tell anyone.

I'm not always right.

Now, here comes the hard part, and make sure to tell your alter this as well:

Neither are you.

One day soon, you will realize this. You'll have the ability to look back on the you from a few years prior, as I do, as anyone of character does, and say "God, what was I thinking? I was such an idiot!" You will realize how pathetic it is to curse several people out on the internet because they like a game that predates your birth.

Flame on, both of you. I'm done talkin' to ya.

funguy2121 don't keep feeding him. It's pointless.

I like L4D2. =D

funguy2121:

TB_Infidel:

I can't really see any debate about this one as its so obvious.
Within the first paragraph you practically admitted your a fan boy who's revelling in a distant time when 2D was good, you were happy, and nieve - as we all are when we're young.

At the end of the day 2D Mario is dated.
Why?
Because it's bad.
That is why things date. If this was not the case then why is there not a cascade of 2D linear games for sale at 35? Because no other company can rely on its fan boys as much as Nintendo.

I don't think I would define fanboy the way that you do. A fanboy is, to me, a person who thinks that their favorite game company/director/anime company can do no wrong. I'm certainly disappointed with a lot of choices that Nintendo has made recently, but as a 29 year old man with a career, social life and literary and musical pursuits, the Wii with its precious few good releases suits me just fine. I do clearly define myself as a lover of retro gaming; the most recent thread I started was about remaking the 8-bit classic Master Blaster.

I can't stand when someone is not willing to see the flaws in the games they love. I, personally, love many games in spite of their imperfections. If you read several pages back, I was debating both extreme sides of this argument with two people on opposite ends of the spectrum. One had the same stance that you and Mazty share, that Mario games are somehow inherently bad simply because the concept is dated, and another took me to task for acknowledging that Nintendo's inclusion of 2 palette-swap Toads was lazy. If you believe that age has anything to do with the quality of a game, then read a few posts up.

This is Nintendo nostalgia b/c Nintendo is the only surviving company (aside from Sega) from the 2D period. Microsoft and Sony got into the game as pseudo-3D was transitioning into 3D, so they're not exactly overflowing with side-scrolling titles to remake.

I'll tell you exactly what I told Mazty: I like something that you don't. It is not incumbent upon me to defend it. If you think it's inherently bad, the burden falls upon you to explain what's wrong with it. Have you played the game?

Edit: Profile check. Did you really have to bring your buddy in here to back you up, Mazty? I was going to tell TBInfidel to read more than one post so he could see your contradictions. It also appears you edited your last post. Where are the barbs about my personality based on my avatar being a bigg'un? I guess you took back the fat hate when you realized Kevin Smith is obese.

You make a fair point about retro gaming and that you are a retro gamer, hence why you like Mario and similar old generation style of games.

However, as I mentioned in my previous post, this style is dated. A dated style is a bad style. That's what progress is, otherwise why did 2D go away?
If you enjoy it fair enough, BUT you can't really defend it as being a retro gamer your opinion will be bias and your a very small minority of people, backing up my point that such a similar remake is aimed at the fan boys or retro gamers (Both enjoying games off nostalgia from the past or raging patriotism).
A good example of this is cars. A car from the 1960's is flat out bad. Its slow, unsafe, uncomfortable, and unreliable. The only reason a person would enjoy a car which is bad is not because of what the car IS, but what it WAS. This could be what it stood for, whether that's happy memories or engineering triumph back in that time. Regardless, the car is still bad.

So by all means go and enjoy the game. However do take into account that your opinion is quite possibly biased and that many people will not agree for good and possibly more valid reasons for why the game is bad.

N.B I have played the original Mario's and briefly the new one. Its very much the same and for some reason, what amused me as a 8 year old does not any more.
Also, Mazty linked me this thread as its an interesting discussion. If you feel insecure about my posts and my opinion, then ill remind you that its the internet and no one can hurt you from behind a keyboard.

funguy2121:

Mazty:
snipped for everyone's sake

You really don't listen, do ya? Did you read more than 20 words?

Reread the first paragraph of what you just posted and think about the inconsistency of your arguments.

You obviously have it in for Nintendo, which is cool; they're a greedy corporation and I don't begrudge you hating on them. They can handle it. Apparently, Sony and Microsoft can't. If I tell you that you win, will you press play on the youtube link and follow its instructions? I guess I have to spell it out for you, since my cavespeak translates poorly into your academic language: I am not aware of anyone who uses Linux on their home computer. I was referring to using a PC vs. using a Mac. Why don't you start a thread that says "vista rules," if it's so great? Also, I don't know if you know this but the average gamer (that's me!) doesn't buy a video game system to buy an overrated, overpriced DVD format that will possibly go the way of the beta max very soon. Aw, shit, now I'm gonna have to explain beta max!

You win!

But seriously, why did you bring an alterego in here with your exact same birthdate, location and join-date to chastise me? "Oh no, now fake people are attacking me too!" I've had fun with this little spat but as you can see, the thread is now torpedo'd. Congratulations. See, it stops being fun for everyone else after a while. I'm gonna tell you something that I don't just tell anyone.

I'm not always right.

Now, here comes the hard part, and make sure to tell your alter this as well:

Neither are you.

One day soon, you will realize this. You'll have the ability to look back on the you from a few years prior, as I do, as anyone of character does, and say "God, what was I thinking? I was such an idiot!" You will realize how pathetic it is to curse several people out on the internet because they like a game that predates your birth.

Flame on, both of you. I'm done talkin' to ya.

No I kept the fat hate speech by the way, that didn't go, and I'm an open hater of people who are fat due to poor eating habits and/or lack of exercise.
Where are the contradictions? The 2D platformers I used as examples are very refined, as in aren't just harking back to the 90's. Please point out the inconsistencies, but then again, you actually elaborating what you mean would be like Israel and Palestine sitting down for a friendly game of backgammon - it's not going to happen.
Stop digressing, I don't care about your thoughts to do with Windows. Overpriced DVD format? Oh you mean bluray, the HD format which is selling well?
http://news.cnet.com/blu-ray-sales-nearly-double-from-a-year-ago/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10288294-1.html
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2009-blu-ray-sales-to-exceed-100-million-discs
Stay up to date with the news before making inane comparisons. If you don't have a HD TV then that's your problem - most people with a relatively new TV can watch at least 720p, and so bluray would seem to be a good idea.
Are you dyslectic? Yes same D.O.B. but the location is a country, bit of room for variation there, and there is a two year difference in join date....Smooth one. He's a mate I linked the thread to because he, like myself, found it hilarious that some people think that what makes a good game doesn't change with age. Plus it's always interesting to see the BS thrown about when a simple question is just asked: "Why is a 2D Mario with relatively no changes a good idea?".
And no, I know I'm not always right, but at least I know that my dislike for the game isn't based in immature name calling, and an inability to actually verbalise my feelings. I genuinely feel sorry for you not being able to write why you feel what you do about something. But for you then to claim that you did, while oh-so maturely calling me name, that's just a douche move.

Ienjoygames:
funguy2121 don't keep feeding him. It's pointless.

But it's so damned tempting!

Ienjoygames:
funguy2121 don't keep feeding him. It's pointless.

Wait. I asked you why you have the notion that good old games are always good, regardless of expectations from games increasing time due to innovation and technology, to which your reply was "Because of higher expectations". Surely then that means the overall quality of games is better. Then, logically, if quality is always improving, now that you have foresight, surely the "good old games" aren't good because they are buggy, look bad, and other games do their genre better? It's either that or modern games in your world are all "F**KING AMAZING!" For example you can't say any modern FPS sucks, becuase they all work as FPS' better than doom as they look better, handle better and do the job better (Up, down, left & right) But somehow I think you're part of the mindset whose views won't change regardless of the logic thrown your way, because the universe may implode or something.

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:
funguy2121 don't keep feeding him. It's pointless.

Wait. I asked you why you have the notion that good old games are always good, regardless of expectations from games increasing time due to innovation and technology, to which your reply was "Because of higher expectations". Surely then that means the overall quality of games is better. Then, logically, if quality is always improving, now that you have foresight, surely the "good old games" aren't good because they are buggy, look bad, and other games do their genre better? It's either that or modern games in your world are all "F**KING AMAZING!" For example you can't say any modern FPS sucks, becuase they all work as FPS' better than doom as they look better, handle better and do the job better (Up, down, left & right) But somehow I think you're part of the mindset whose views won't change regardless of the logic thrown your way, because the universe may implode or something.

I think he was talking about technical expectations, not necessarily enjoyment when he said that. The old games are still enjoyable.

Okay, how about this for a reason NSMB Wii is a good game: IT'S FUN

Forget innovation, forget challenge (even though it gets pretty damn challenging in the later stages), forget the nostalgia factor. It's just a damn fun game! Why do we need to judge on innovation alone? Can't we have room for both innovation AND the familiar?

And as for old games, yes it's true, some games age terribly (example: Driver, because that's the only game Mazty can seem to talk about), but some withstand the test of time very well (example: Super Metroid, Mega Man 2, Final Fantasy Tactics). They still control well and are very fun to play! It's foolish to make a blanket statement like "Good games from the past are not good games anymore". Not even Yahtzee would say something like that.

jalee:
Okay, how about this for a reason NSMB Wii is a good game: IT'S FUN

Forget innovation, forget challenge (even though it gets pretty damn challenging in the later stages), forget the nostalgia factor. It's just a damn fun game! Why do we need to judge on innovation alone? Can't we have room for both innovation AND the familiar?

And as for old games, yes it's true, some games age terribly (example: Driver, because that's the only game Matzy can seem to talk about), but some withstand the test of time very well (example: Super Metroid, Mega Man 2, Final Fantasy Tactics). They still control well and are very fun to play! It's foolish to make a blanket statement like "Good games from the past are not good games anymore". Not even Yahtzee would say something like that.

Most have had superior sequels though, so to then jump back 15 years seems retarded considering all the changes made.

Mazty:

jalee:
Okay, how about this for a reason NSMB Wii is a good game: IT'S FUN

Forget innovation, forget challenge (even though it gets pretty damn challenging in the later stages), forget the nostalgia factor. It's just a damn fun game! Why do we need to judge on innovation alone? Can't we have room for both innovation AND the familiar?

And as for old games, yes it's true, some games age terribly (example: Driver, because that's the only game Matzy can seem to talk about), but some withstand the test of time very well (example: Super Metroid, Mega Man 2, Final Fantasy Tactics). They still control well and are very fun to play! It's foolish to make a blanket statement like "Good games from the past are not good games anymore". Not even Yahtzee would say something like that.

Most have had superior sequels though, so to then jump back 15 years seems retarded considering all the changes made.

Some of those changes make it back. You can ground-pound, wall jump, and pretty much maneuver like 3D Mario in a 2D plane.

Mazty:
Most have had superior sequels though, so to then jump back 15 years seems retarded considering all the changes made.

But is the game still fun? In this case, my answer is an emphatic YES. Why should I care about anything else?

Besides, a lot has changed in 15 years with this game. There's new suits (Propeller, Penguin, Ice), new level gimmicks, new moves, new bosses, etc. Anyone who has played the game past the first two or three worlds can easily tell you that this is not the same game as Super Mario Bros 3 or Super Mario World. Yes, the premise and basic gameplay is the same, but saying SMW and NSMB Wii are exactly the same is like saying God of War and God of War 2 are exactly the same game. Improvements have been made, changes have been made, new level designs have been made.

Here, I'll even play devil's advocate: New Super Mario Bros for the DS was not innovative and not really that fun. That game really was going through the motions and felt like a bunch of recycled ideas. NSMB Wii is a much better thought out game and a lot more fun.

Also, as for "superior sequels", most gamers and gaming critics still consider Super Metroid and Mega Man 2 to be the best games in their series and among the best games of all time, even after all these years.

am i the only one who noticed the maps in this one are god awful compared to the first one? no immersion at all.

Immersion is subjective though.

DrDeath3191:

Mazty:

Ienjoygames:
funguy2121 don't keep feeding him. It's pointless.

Wait. I asked you why you have the notion that good old games are always good, regardless of expectations from games increasing time due to innovation and technology, to which your reply was "Because of higher expectations". Surely then that means the overall quality of games is better. Then, logically, if quality is always improving, now that you have foresight, surely the "good old games" aren't good because they are buggy, look bad, and other games do their genre better? It's either that or modern games in your world are all "F**KING AMAZING!" For example you can't say any modern FPS sucks, becuase they all work as FPS' better than doom as they look better, handle better and do the job better (Up, down, left & right) But somehow I think you're part of the mindset whose views won't change regardless of the logic thrown your way, because the universe may implode or something.

I think he was talking about technical expectations, not necessarily enjoyment when he said that. The old games are still enjoyable.

Yeah well, that was kinda what I said.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here