What Has Nintendo Done Right Lately?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

the hidden eagle:

Mcoffey:

the hidden eagle:
So you don't support the company unless they go multiplat?What if they don't want to do that?Also you severely underestimate the numbers of Nintendo's fanbase and continue to spread the myth that the company is doing worse financially.

If there's one thing I've learned from people who constantly demand Nintendo to go third party it's that they don't care about the costs Nintendo would have to deal with just to satisfy them.They don't care that Nintendo would have to pay royalties to both Sony and Microsoft in order to develop games on their consoles.They don't give a fuck about the game's quality because all that matters to them is that Nintendo bend themselves over just to cater to those who are part of the "it's all about me" crowd.

You want to play Mario and Zelda?Then buy the console those games are released on.

I don't support a company that makes what I feel to be chronic bad decisions. A company doesn't have to be multiplat, of course, but, if Nintendo did it, it would be the first good decision in years.

You're right. I truly don't care about the costs. I give exactly as many fucks about Nintendo as I do EA or Ubisoft (Who also pay royalties to Microsoft and Sony, but still seem to be doing pretty well for themselves). You shouldn't care about a company that you have no stake in because they don't care about you. They make a product. You pay them if you like it. That is the extent of your relationship to them. And if they want my money, then yeah, it is all about me.

I'd like to play Zelda or Metroid (Not a big Mario guy), but I don't need to. Certainly not enough to buy something like the WiiU.

Just because you have money does'nt mean a company has to bend over for you.Since Nintendo is one of the big 3 Sony and Microsoft would make damn sure they take the lion's share of profits so it would hurt the company's bottom line in the long run.

I care about companies that make quality products and I will support them in anyway I can.I will always be against Nintendo going third party because I believe that will effect the quality of their games.

Ya never know until they try! And I sincerely doubt Microsoft and Sony would be petty enough to sabotage Nintendo if they went 3rd Party. Nintendo didn't beat up on Sega when they did, right? Those two have made some pretty dumb decisions in the paste, but pettiness isn't something that factors into it when millions of dollars are on the table. They'd probably treat them just like any other developer.

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:
Just because you have money does'nt mean a company has to bend over for you.

And their console isn't selling because of that attitude. And their stock is i ntrouble, and their profits faltering for the first time ever, and their investors angry.

Do you really support cutting off your nose to spite your face?

Since Nintendo is one of the big 3 Sony and Microsoft would make damn sure they take the lion's share of profits so it would hurt the company's bottom line in the long run.

Both of those companies have benefited from backing off bad ideas and listening to consumer response.

I care about companies that make quality products and I will support them in anyway I can.

I thought we were talking about Nintendo.

You would have to be a blind fool to argue that Nintendo does'nt make high quality games.They don't put any bullshit like piece meal DLC,tacked on multiplayer,and a bunch of other things that most of the AAA just loves to put in.

Riverwolf:
The one Zero Punctuation episode that I don't rewatch is the one where he refers to both Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time as pieces of ****, at least compared to Super Mario Sunshine and Twilight Princess, respectively. Now, while I'm sure he was at least partially joking, those games are kind of sacred cows for me (and I thought SMS was awful), so the joke unfortunately hurts. But I don't get mad at Yahtzee for it; rather I don't watch that episode.

To be perfectly honest, I liked Twilight Princess (my favorite game of all time actually) and Super Mario Sunshine more than Ocarina of Time (second favorite game of all time, so not by much) and Super Mario 64 (never had a N64, so I never played it.)

My first real console was the GameCube (my family got a PS1 a few years before it, but I never played it that much or really beat any game for it myself.) It is still my favorite console. Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time, Resident Evil 4, Majora's Mask, and The Wind Waker were all games I first played on the console. Those games, along with Skyward Sword, are my top six games of all time. Soul Calibur II is my favorite fighting game of all time. And everybody knows it was best on GameCube. Super Mario Sunshine was the first Mario game to be in 3-D without that awkward polygonal look to it. Beyond Good & Evil (which I have yet to beat) was on it. As was Spider-Man 2 and Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. And Hulk: Ultimate Destruction.

Thanatos2k:

Misterian:
I'm personally not worried about what's going on with Nintendo lately, they've had their slip-ups in the past, sure, but they always eventually bounced back on their feet.

Besides, has Nintendo ever tried to shove DRM down our throats?

Oh, you mean like region locking?

Has Nintendo taken up using anti-consumer methods?

Oh, you mean like region locking?

Did Nintendo ever try to kill the used game market?

They try to kill youtube videos about their games instead.

Did Nintendo ever try to shun backwards compatibility?

Region locking hurts it.

Two things that puts Nintendo in a bad light...whihc is nothing compared to the laundry lists of things that several AAA game devs/publishers are guilty of.

What the hell is the big deal about region locking, anyway? I can't even think of any games in Japan that I'd want that aren't being localized.

Big_Willie_Styles:

Riverwolf:
The one Zero Punctuation episode that I don't rewatch is the one where he refers to both Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time as pieces of ****, at least compared to Super Mario Sunshine and Twilight Princess, respectively. Now, while I'm sure he was at least partially joking, those games are kind of sacred cows for me (and I thought SMS was awful), so the joke unfortunately hurts. But I don't get mad at Yahtzee for it; rather I don't watch that episode.

To be perfectly honest, I liked Twilight Princess (my favorite game of all time actually) and Super Mario Sunshine more than Ocarina of Time (second favorite game of all time, so not my much) and Super Mario 64 (never had a N64, so I never played it.)

My first real console was the GameCube (my family got a PS1 a few years before it, but I never played it that much or really beat any game for it myself.) It is still my favorite console. Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time, Resident Evil 4, Majora's Mask, and The Wind Waker were all games I first played on the console. Those games, along with Skyward Sword, are my top six games of all time. Soul Calibur II is my favorite fighting game of all time. And everybody knows it was best on GameCube. Super Mario Sunshine was the first Mario game to be in 3-D without that awkward polygonal look to it. Beyond Good & Evil (which I have yet to beat) was on it. As was Spider-Man 2 and Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. And Hulk: Ultimate Destruction.

Don't get me wrong: I love the GameCube. And yes, though I didn't like Mario Sunshine, it did look beautiful. I just didn't like the whole "clean up the town" mechanic, and also thought the game was too hard. But to each their own; if you find the polygon look awkward, then you probably won't enjoy Mario 64 much (and don't play the DS version; it's really not that great.) In any case, Super Mario Galaxy is easily superior. Those other games you mentioned are also fantastic (...though I haven't played Ultimate Destruction, but I remember hearing at the time that it was good... and... I... don't particularly... enjoy... ... Sands of Time ... *wince*).

Oh, and speaking of specific consoles, I want to point out another thing regarding Nintendo: they're not anywhere near in the same boat as Sega was in 2001. Nintendo overall is doing fine. The WiiU is just not doing fine. Sega was nailing itself into a coffin right from the beginning with the Sega CD and 32X. They furthered their own downfall by designing the Saturn with arcane hardware making it difficult to program for, and THEN releasing it early before said programmers could really experiment what could be done with the thing, and so launch games tended to be shadows of what they could have been. Perhaps at least one of the final nails in the coffin for Sega was their expectation that the absurdly expensive Shenmue might save the failing Dreamcast... which it didn't, being a very, very slow game with virtually no mainstream appeal.

If Nintendo's to be placed anywhere on that, I'd put them kind of on the beginning-leaning side of the middle, with the WiiU kind of being a cross between 32X (lack of software) and Saturn (arcane hardware). IOW, they can afford to lose with the WiiU, but I doubt they can afford to lose with another console.

the hidden eagle:
[You would have to be a blind fool to argue that Nintendo does'nt make high quality games.

Can't you provide a cogent argument rather that personal insults?

They don't put any bullshit like piece meal DLC,tacked on multiplayer,and a bunch of other things that most of the AAA just loves to put in.

So the absence of stupid (and sometimes desired) makes a game high quality?

That's a bad argument. That's like calling someone a genius because they didn't aim a loaded gun at their head to see why it's not firing. And differentiating Mario multiplayer from "tacked on" is a rather difficult task.

itsmeyouidiot:
What the hell is the big deal about region locking, anyway? I can't even think of any games in Japan that I'd want that aren't being localized.

I can't, either, but I can't think of the last time the two of us were the only consumers in the world.

itsmeyouidiot:
What the hell is the big deal about region locking, anyway? I can't even think of any games in Japan that I'd want that aren't being localized.

The United States isn't the only one hurt by it. Try thinking about other places.

the hidden eagle:
Two things that puts Nintendo in a bad light...whihc is nothing compared to the laundry lists of things that several AAA game devs/publishers are guilty of.

"Well at least they don't do this!" is not an argument.

I will always be against Nintendo going third party because I believe that will effect the quality of their games.

Care to explain why this is without using Sega as an argument? Because they're not an argument as well. Them going 3rd party didn't affect the quality of their games, their inability to listen to consumer demand for no apparent reason at all affected the quality of their games.

itsmeyouidiot:
What the hell is the big deal about region locking, anyway? I can't even think of any games in Japan that I'd want that aren't being localized.

image
You really wanna go there?

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:
[You would have to be a blind fool to argue that Nintendo does'nt make high quality games.

Can't you provide a cogent argument rather that personal insults?

They don't put any bullshit like piece meal DLC,tacked on multiplayer,and a bunch of other things that most of the AAA just loves to put in.

So the absence of stupid (and sometimes desired) makes a game high quality?

That's a bad argument. That's like calling someone a genius because they didn't aim a loaded gun at their head to see why it's not firing. And differentiating Mario multiplayer from "tacked on" is a rather difficult task.

How was what I said a personaly insult?If you're seriously trying to argue that Nintendo does'nt make quality games then this is a pointless conversation since no matter what I say your bias will make you ignore it anyway.But I will say this:You'll be hard pressed to find a Nintendo game that's actually bad.No one can say with a straight face that Nintendo makes games that are buggy or downright broken which is something that can't be said for major publishers like EA.

Grenge Di Origin:

the hidden eagle:
Two things that puts Nintendo in a bad light...whihc is nothing compared to the laundry lists of things that several AAA game devs/publishers are guilty of.

"Well at least they don't do this!" is not an argument.

I will always be against Nintendo going third party because I believe that will effect the quality of their games.

Care to explain why this is without using Sega as an argument? Because they're not an argument as well. Them going 3rd party didn't affect the quality of their games, their inability to listen to consumer demand for no apparent reason at all affected the quality of their games.

itsmeyouidiot:
What the hell is the big deal about region locking, anyway? I can't even think of any games in Japan that I'd want that aren't being localized.

image
You really wanna go there?

Playing up Nintendo's negatives isn't a argument either.But since you asked the reason Nintendo going third party will effect the quality of their games is because they would have to do two times the work for multiple systems.What makes a game like Zelda great is because alot of time was put into developing it,going third party would have a serious effect on games like that which would result in them being watered down.

the hidden eagle:
How was what I said a personaly insult?

I disagreed. You said you'd have to be a blind fool to disagree. That was oddly specific.

If you're seriously trying to argue that Nintendo does'nt make games then this is a pointless conversation since no matter what I say your bias will make you ignore it anyway.

I'm inclined to agree that I won't agree with you on this, but it has more to do with the strength of your argument. For example:

But I will say this:You'll be hard pressed to find a Nintendo game that's actually bad.

See, "not bad" doesn't equal high quality, which was your claim. Nor does "not broken" or "not buggy."

No one can say with a straight face that Nintendo makes games that are buggy or downright broken which is something that can't be said for major publishers like EA.

I can't thnk of a broken Nintendo game, but that doesn't make them high quality. However, I can remember more than a few "nuggy" games. I can't name the last Pokémon game I played that didn't have bugs and glitches. and they actually patch out some of the bugs found in the Japanese games before US releases (as was the case with D/P and I think also B/W).

If you mean "broken and buggy" in a meaningful sense, though, why bring up EA? Most of their games aren't broken or buggy. And honestly, it seems like your argument is less "Nintendo is making good games and quality products" than it is "Nintendo isn't EA, unlike some companies who shall remain nameless."

And still, the point of apologetics that Nintendo shouldn't care what other people have to say is fine if they're not concerned with making money. With the exception of the Wii, their userbase has seen steady decline now for years and years and years....

Nobody should ever listen to the consumer completely, but when your company can't move a product in sufficient numbers it's time to stp thinking you have your finger on the pulse. Nintendo can keep on with the attitude you're espousing, but it'll likely take them to the grave. A slow trip no doubt, but even a company with large assets can't keep posting losses forever.

the hidden eagle:
they would have to do two times the work for multiple systems.What makes a game like Zelda great is because alot of time was put into developing it,going third party would have a serious effect on games like that which would result in them being watered down.

That's under the false assumption that they ABSOLUTELY MUST develop for one platform.

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:
How was what I said a personaly insult?

I disagreed. You said you'd have to be a blind fool to disagree. That was oddly specific.

If you're seriously trying to argue that Nintendo does'nt make games then this is a pointless conversation since no matter what I say your bias will make you ignore it anyway.

I'm inclined to agree that I won't agree with you on this, but it has more to do with the strength of your argument. For example:

But I will say this:You'll be hard pressed to find a Nintendo game that's actually bad.

See, "not bad" doesn't equal high quality, which was your claim. Nor does "not broken" or "not buggy."

No one can say with a straight face that Nintendo makes games that are buggy or downright broken which is something that can't be said for major publishers like EA.

I can't thnk of a broken Nintendo game, but that doesn't make them high quality. However, I can remember more than a few "nuggy" games. I can't name the last Pokémon game I played that didn't have bugs and glitches. and they actually patch out some of the bugs found in the Japanese games before US releases (as was the case with D/P and I think also B/W).

If you mean "broken and buggy" in a meaningful sense, though, why bring up EA? Most of their games aren't broken or buggy. And honestly, it seems like your argument is less "Nintendo is making good games and quality products" than it is "Nintendo isn't EA, unlike some companies who shall remain nameless."

And still, the point of apologetics that Nintendo shouldn't care what other people have to say is fine if they're not concerned with making money. With the exception of the Wii, their userbase has seen steady decline now for years and years and years....

Nobody should ever listen to the consumer completely, but when your company can't move a product in sufficient numbers it's time to stp thinking you have your finger on the pulse. Nintendo can keep on with the attitude you're espousing, but it'll likely take them to the grave. A slow trip no doubt, but even a company with large assets can't keep posting losses forever.

I said you would have to be blind to argue that Nintendo does'nt make good games in a general way of speaking,I was'n targetting you specifically and if my post came across like that then I apologize for not wording it better.Anyway the reason I bring up EA is because the last couple of games they released were broken on release.Sim City and BF4 were beyond playable online and people were rightfully upset.

When Nintendo makes games that are in that state then you can say their games aren't quality made.Now that's not to say some games can't be average but to my knowledge Nintendo hasn't made a game where it can't be played on release because of bugs.

the hidden eagle:

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:
How was what I said a personaly insult?

I disagreed. You said you'd have to be a blind fool to disagree. That was oddly specific.

If you're seriously trying to argue that Nintendo does'nt make games then this is a pointless conversation since no matter what I say your bias will make you ignore it anyway.

I'm inclined to agree that I won't agree with you on this, but it has more to do with the strength of your argument. For example:

But I will say this:You'll be hard pressed to find a Nintendo game that's actually bad.

See, "not bad" doesn't equal high quality, which was your claim. Nor does "not broken" or "not buggy."

No one can say with a straight face that Nintendo makes games that are buggy or downright broken which is something that can't be said for major publishers like EA.

I can't thnk of a broken Nintendo game, but that doesn't make them high quality. However, I can remember more than a few "nuggy" games. I can't name the last Pokémon game I played that didn't have bugs and glitches. and they actually patch out some of the bugs found in the Japanese games before US releases (as was the case with D/P and I think also B/W).

If you mean "broken and buggy" in a meaningful sense, though, why bring up EA? Most of their games aren't broken or buggy. And honestly, it seems like your argument is less "Nintendo is making good games and quality products" than it is "Nintendo isn't EA, unlike some companies who shall remain nameless."

And still, the point of apologetics that Nintendo shouldn't care what other people have to say is fine if they're not concerned with making money. With the exception of the Wii, their userbase has seen steady decline now for years and years and years....

Nobody should ever listen to the consumer completely, but when your company can't move a product in sufficient numbers it's time to stp thinking you have your finger on the pulse. Nintendo can keep on with the attitude you're espousing, but it'll likely take them to the grave. A slow trip no doubt, but even a company with large assets can't keep posting losses forever.

I said you would have to be blind to argue that Nintendo does'nt make good games in a general way of speaking,I was'n targetting you specifically and if my post came across like that then I apologize for not wording it better.Anyway the reason I bring up EA is because the last couple of games they released were broken on release.Sim City and BF4 were beyond playable online and people were rightfully upset.

When Nintendo makes games that are in that state then you can say their games aren't quality made.Now that's not to say some games can't be average but to my knowledge Nintendo hasn't made a game where it can't be played on release because of bugs.

Both Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword shipped with game-breaking bugs that prevent you from finishing them, both late in their respective games (Skyward Sword does have a patch.)

the hidden eagle:

When Nintendo makes games that are in that state then you can say their games aren't quality made.

If that's your standard of quality, then your standard is so low as to be meaningless.

we need to send Yahtzee to nintendo's headquarters and make them listen to his views on all they've done that's wrong lately.. maybe get them to pull their heads out of their butts and figure that what they did in the 90's doesn't work anymore

Thanatos2k:

Has Nintendo taken up using anti-consumer methods?

Oh, you mean like region locking?

Region Locking is an anti-arbitrage measure, not specifically anti-consumer measure.
It has anti-consumer side effects for stable/similar economies (which sucks), but in the face of arbitrage the weaker game markets might as well not exist in the first place without region locking.

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:

When Nintendo makes games that are in that state then you can say their games aren't quality made.

If that's your standard of quality, then your standard is so low as to be meaningless.

What?So just because I think quality games aren't those who have game breaking bugs that are not patched I must have low standards?

Atmos Duality:

IrisNetwork:
On hindsight, Nintendo really isn't good at doing other than games. Remember when they made TV shows and movies?

Nintendo contracted DIC Entertainment to produce that on the cheap. Nintendo approved it, but they didn't produce it.

And that was pretty much what ever cartoon of that era of television was like. Especially DIC produced ones. The mid 80s was not known for hard-hitting intelligent writing of their cartoons in the United States. Basically they were just product selling flashing lights to keep your kids occupied.

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:

When Nintendo makes games that are in that state then you can say their games aren't quality made.

If that's your standard of quality, then your standard is so low as to be meaningless.

I think he means in terms of software stability. In that way, they're very much superior to pretty much everyone else (one game-breaking bug in two games is hardly equal to the dozens of game-breaking bugs in other high-profile games).

...besides, in terms of fun, Nintendo is hardly the lowest bar in terms of quality. They're fun enough, at least for kids (their primary target audience, so that's exactly what they should be), and I'd certainly rather spend a few hours with them than I would with almost any so-called "realistic" war shooter (modern or otherwise), or ANY of the "gritty re-imaginings" of classic colorful games (ever see Bomberman Zero or that new Golden Axe game?)

the hidden eagle:
You would have to be a blind fool to argue that Nintendo does'nt make high quality games.They don't put any bullshit like piece meal DLC,tacked on multiplayer,and a bunch of other things that most of the AAA just loves to put in.

Except for maybe Fire Emblem Awakening and the map DLCs, though they're completely optional and the main game has plenty of content. Also, Bravely Default has some micro transaction-like features in it, but that was Square's doing. Also, region locking is bullshit as other people have already mentioned.

Anyway. I think I'll just stay out of Nintendo threads from now on. It's become apparent to me that people who complain the loudest about Nintendo not doing anything interesting in years, haven't been playing their systems.

KazeAizen:

st0pnsw0p:

KazeAizen:

Personally I think the worst they've is copyright claim youtube videos and such. Something along those lines anyways because they are pretty protective of their IP. Their almost like Disney in that regard. However if that is the worst of their crimes towards consumers then they are freaking saints compared to others that actually do all the stuff you just listed.

They also keep their games at full price for years and years (SMG2's and NSMBW's price only dropped in summer of last year, and even then they only went from $50 to $30), they're the only console maker that still implements region lock and they release two different versions of Pokemon games at a time even though they're essentially the same but with slightly different rosters of pokemon. They're no more of a saint than many of the other game companies, they just have different ways to suck the money out of people than the others.

Eh I've never dealt with Region Lock so its not my concern. If those are literally the worst crimes Nintendo has committed then yeah they are pretty dang saintly compared to everyone else.

Everyone else being who, exactly? Apart from EA and the browser/mobile developers, I don't recall anyone doing anything particularly evil recently.

the hidden eagle:

Zachary Amaranth:

the hidden eagle:

When Nintendo makes games that are in that state then you can say their games aren't quality made.

If that's your standard of quality, then your standard is so low as to be meaningless.

What?So just because I think quality games aren't those who have game breaking bugs that are not patched I must have low standards?

The problem is that you're defining things by what they aren't, which is pretty much the least useful way to do it. Consider for instance, a rock. My rock required no patches and has no game breaking bugs. By the logic you have presented in this thread, my rock is a quality game.

We could go further, you could say that a quality game must fit the typical definition of game, having rules and win/lose conditions. Which would mean that my rock is not a quality game, but "ET: the Extra-Terrestrial" a game released for the Atari 2600 and "Annoying Stick" released for the PS1, largely considered two of the worst games ever made, still meet your requirements for a quality game.

Nintendo had the highest reviewed games last year. They sold the most hardware last year too. Telling them to abandon everything and say there games arent good is stupid.

Dead Century:

the hidden eagle:
You would have to be a blind fool to argue that Nintendo does'nt make high quality games.They don't put any bullshit like piece meal DLC,tacked on multiplayer,and a bunch of other things that most of the AAA just loves to put in.

Except for maybe Fire Emblem Awakening and the map DLCs, though they're completely optional and the main game has plenty of content. Also, Bravely Default has some micro transaction-like features in it, but that was Square's doing. Also, region locking is bullshit as other people have already mentioned.

NSMBU and Pikmin 3 also have DLC and Nintendo is making two Free-To-Play games at the moment.

As for tacked on multiplayer... Maybe the multiplayer modes in Galaxy 1 and 2? I didn't feel they were necesarry at all, which is the main complaint people have when they call multiplayer modes "tacked-on", so I guess it qualifies. Thet's pretty much all I can think of, all their other multiplayer games (that I've played) have had quality multiplayer.

Nintendo has sold 40 Million+ 3DS's, which is fucking amazing when you consider many were calling it dead in the water after its release. A Link Between Worlds sold almost 2 Million units and a majority of reviewers have given it positive feedback.

Honestly, if Nintendo drops out of consoles, it wouldn't be to go third party; it would be to focus on its handheld. That is a much more feasible business strategy.

st0pnsw0p:

KazeAizen:

st0pnsw0p:
They also keep their games at full price for years and years (SMG2's and NSMBW's price only dropped in summer of last year, and even then they only went from $50 to $30), they're the only console maker that still implements region lock and they release two different versions of Pokemon games at a time even though they're essentially the same but with slightly different rosters of pokemon. They're no more of a saint than many of the other game companies, they just have different ways to suck the money out of people than the others.

Eh I've never dealt with Region Lock so its not my concern. If those are literally the worst crimes Nintendo has committed then yeah they are pretty dang saintly compared to everyone else.

Everyone else being who, exactly? Apart from EA and the browser/mobile developers, I don't recall anyone doing anything particularly evil recently.

Capcom, Activision, and Ubisoft and some of their past transgressions come to mind. Also the recent antics of King the creators of Candy Crush Saga.

KazeAizen:

st0pnsw0p:

KazeAizen:

Eh I've never dealt with Region Lock so its not my concern. If those are literally the worst crimes Nintendo has committed then yeah they are pretty dang saintly compared to everyone else.

Everyone else being who, exactly? Apart from EA and the browser/mobile developers, I don't recall anyone doing anything particularly evil recently.

Capcom, Activision, and Ubisoft and some of their past transgressions come to mind. Also the recent antics of King the creators of Candy Crush Saga.

If you're going to judge publishers based on their past offenses, you might as well add Nintendo's to the mix as well, in which case you lose the argument because they did a lot of nasty stuff back in their NES days (and there was that controversy. Give me something recent (let's say, anything that happened shortly before, during or after 2012, and like I said in my previous post, by someone other than EA and mobile/browser devs).

King's copyright antics, yes, that was completely awful, and the other three you mentioned have hade their fair share of evil business practices, but even so, they're far from being "everyone else".

Spandexpanda:
They need to get Wii U consoles out in homes at the moment, and that's just not happening with the current lineup. If they were to make Wii fit U bundle for about Ł200, and market it as a wii fit/web browser tablet for the living room/streaming device as well as games console. If they actually put advertising campaigns on tv denoting the console as the successor to the wii then people would probably realise that it's even a console. Then make another bundle with a wii U + 3ds and copies of the new Smash Bros which is available on both I believe. That'd get a bit more market penetration and then they could shift a few more games, possibly generate a bit more interest from 3rd party developers.

Honestly, if they'd just allow the controller to connect via wifi from anywhere (which it has no reason not to be able to imo), I'd probably buy it at the first opportunity. I think Vita has that option now with the PS4 and is one of the reasons I might get it. I think WiiU controller screen is better though, but not sure.

Atmos Duality:

Thanatos2k:

Has Nintendo taken up using anti-consumer methods?

Oh, you mean like region locking?

Region Locking is an anti-arbitrage measure, not specifically anti-consumer measure.
It has anti-consumer side effects for stable/similar economies (which sucks), but in the face of arbitrage the weaker game markets might as well not exist in the first place without region locking.

Arbitrage is a consumer right, so yes, it's anti-consumer.

It's also anti-consumer to lock people out when they don't localize titles.

Riverwolf:
Both Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword shipped with game-breaking bugs that prevent you from finishing them, both late in their respective games (Skyward Sword does have a patch.)

Also, the latest Pokemon shipped with a save corrupting bug that was extremely easy to hit. (It has been patched, but "Nintendo doesn't ship with bugs" has long been untrue)

Ive had Sony and MS consoles but never Nintendos, the games and consoles have never appealed to me. So guess they are doing something wrong because none of their games appeal to me.

I know you aren't responding to me, but you are responding to points that I would make, so I'll provide counter arguments anyways.

Grenge Di Origin:

Thing is, Rupees were a thing in Wind Waker, but they weren't the only thing to collect, unlike A Link Between Worlds.

As a fan of TWW, so much so that I even speedrun it, I'm not going to deny the charms of it, but...

The necessity of Rupees in Wind Waker was literally the most shoehorned-in idea that it had, substituting for dungeons that they couldn't finish on time. While rupees matter, they matter solely for the sake of purchasing progression tokens at the end of the game. No one complained when they removed 5/8ths of the total fee from the original game in the HD rerelease. In ALBW, however, rupees purchase equipment with actual function beyond plot progression. In fact, I'd go as far to say that ALBW is the only Zelda game to do Rupees right. In general, there's always something to do with them in buying equipment so you can upgrade it. In contrast, in just about every other Zelda game the player has more rupees than the game knows what to do with after a certain point.

Also, this may be a technicality, but there certainly were other things to collect besides rupees. The Maiamais, for example.
However, I suspect that you are referring to mini-dungeon rewards, and in that regard you're absolutely correct beyond the occasional heart piece. In addition, the Maiamai equivalent in TWW, Treasure Charts, are usually hidden at the end of a puzzle on one of the game's many islands which was a big part of what made the game tick as a sandbox.

However, while the minidungeon design in TWW is better, TWW suffers in its actual dungeon design. Many dungeons had fairly linear paths to dungeon items; For example, Earth Temple, beyond one optional room in the left half is fairly linear in progression up to the dungeon item. It never really feels entirely like you discover treasure when you find a dungeon item, because it's mandatory for progression. Puzzles can only have so much difficulty because the items are mandatory as well. While the items are still rewarding to use for being really well designed and fun, it's not because you solved something difficult to get them. In contrast, the optional dungeon items in ALBW always feel rewarding when you get them. For example, in ALBW Dark Palace, the Master Ore inside is really well hidden, requiring careful observation to catch. When I figured it out, it felt really good, but it would not have been acceptable design had it been for an actual dungeon item.

As an example demonstrating that there is a difficulty limit, consider Paper Mario: Sticker Star. The puzzles in that game were really hard, but it never felt very good to solve because completing the puzzles was mandatory for progression. While I'd feel good that I payed close attention and got the three treasures well hidden in earlier levels to find an alternate route in the desert level, it gave me serious discomfort when the only reward was further progression of the game, no collectible, no anything acknowledging how hard the puzzle was to solve. With optional collectibles, however, hard puzzles work because you know you can quit. You try to solve the puzzle because you want to, not because you have to.

Granted, much of these rewards are present in ALttP, with two optional dungeon items in the red tunic and the blue tunic among other optional items in minidungeons. However, there haven't been many optional unique dungeon items since then. OoT, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, both of the DS games, Minish Cap, all have few optional items with major effect on gameplay to work with. While many of those games have Treasure Charts or Heart Pieces or some equivalent it's really not the same feeling as a new shield, a sword upgrade, or a damage reduction, all of which provide visible changes beyond rupee count or heart gauge.
Zelda as a series before this game seemed to forget that it doesn't need dungeon items to be the sole focus of each dungeon, and this game allows it to remember.

Additionally, for all the open world in TWW, the actual dungeon path is ridiculously linear. If you get stuck at ANY dungeon at any point in time, you cannot progress the game narrative further, period, despite the many wonderful distractions you have at your disposal. This makes speedrunning the game kind of annoying; There's very little interesting routing going on relative to, say, OoT all dungeons, with getting a single item early being the highlight of the route.

I do wonder how you reacted to his statement of "Wind Waker is good." in his Wind Waker HD review. He also wants Nintendo to be so daring as to put personality back into its characters. Each and every citizen of Windfall Island had their own distinct style and personality, you could easily distinguish each and every citizen. And then there's Tetra. Tetra had something that no other Zelda had before: attitude. She was fearless, she was commanding, she didn't take anyone being stupid with her. I loved when I saw her meet Link for the first time, because it didn't feel like some meeting of fate. She even brushed him off. It was positively refreshing. She even has that trademark wink, a charming representation of her relationship between her and Link that, again, I've never seen again in a Zelda game. I don't know the fine details of what Yahtzee wants, but I sure as hell want character, charm, and maybe even self-directed comedy back into the series again. It's amazing how he doesn't address the character and charm of the characters in his Skyward Sword review...

This game is more a return to form of sorts. It focuses on mechanics over story, and seems to be a study in how to move forward with the series. While I certainly desire that level of charm and personality in later games, I don't mind that they put it aside here becuase it should be OK to focus on mechanics to refine the series, even if they've been on shaky ground in the past.

Except you have to get the money to get them in the first place and farming is a lot harder to pull off this time so this criticism isn't very valid.

Fact: I had over 2000 Rupees by the time I got to Lorule, for all the silver Rupees I found through the "puzzle rooms." This counter-point isn't very valid.

If you're doing every puzzle room that you run across, then that sounds like a working sandbox to me. The game didn't just drown you in rupees; you did puzzles for them!

In addition, if you want to actually upgrade your equipment, you have to buy it. It's like 8000~9000 rupees to buy everything, so there's no lack of things to do with those rupees, which is kinda the point.

Death Mountain says otherwise. I've died at least three times early on because the enemies there do too much damage.

Then whose fault is it they rushed into the Lynels (whose attacks are easily dodge-able) and got themselves killed? Dying repeatedly to them doesn't denote difficulty, it denotes your inability to realize that you don't need to kill all the enemies you find on the overworld.

So the argument is that the people who are having fun and enjoyed the game just suck at it, while people who are great at the game hate it? Bizarre.
(To be fair, this is a little misrepresentative, as Lynels only appear in select sections of the game that are far off the beaten path. If that sort of difficulty lasted throughout the game, it would be a different story; had this had been a few more inches closer to Dark Souls in difficulty, it could have been great instead of merely good. There should have been a normal mode between hero and the current, and the modes really should have been available from the start, but I wouldn't suggest that they shouldn't have tried.)

I struggled with the game, personally, but I can't really comment on the difficulty for anyone else. My B button barely works on my 3DS, which made some things an inexorable challenge, making using the sword properly on certain bosses, say the second Yuga fight, very difficult. As a result, I stopped renting weapons after Lorule popped up, instead restricting myself to only purchasing them out or renting out one or two of a desire to avoid losing too many rupees. I did try save scumming at first but that really ruins the game, making it way too frustrating.

When the game is played that way, it's actually really well-balanced and fun. You can't just go anywhere you'd like, but you collect 2 or 3 items and roll with them and see where you you can go with them, see what treasure you can get with them so you collect more treasure until you have enough to get the weapon that you need for a specific dungeon that you know the location of. In addition, it feels like you're preparing for the dungeons instead of just wandering in, which personally made me feel good about myself even it even if it is quite obvious what you need.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 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