Viewing Thread:
"Why do you jism over crap games?"

None of the Gamecube 'classics' are actually all that great and Nintendo themselves haven't made a genuinely excellent game in years. All they churn out is this overcomplicated boring pretentious toss. Deep? Developing storylines? Pffft...you're the ones who constantly criticise others for valuing themes and graphics over gameplay... If anything, Nintendo are one of the worst for plastering their games with excess crap that disguises dull, repetitive and lacking gameplay.

Give me Streets of Rage any day.

Everyone in here have refused to budge on their opinion it's not fair you isolate me. Strafio persuaded me that Metroid would work better in third person and that Donkey Kong should be made a bit like Crash Bandicoot.

Rickoss persuaded me to re-play a game i hated and helped me love the game.

Someone or other, Belldandy probably, persuaded me that RARE were a critical loss to Nintendo.

Things I've never budged on is the greatness of the Gamecube controller, the Gamecube didi discs and how good Sunshine and Wind Waker are.

Icaruss wrote:
> But, of course, you're all thinking, "Why bother arguing? It
> doesn't really matter if it's 1st or 2nd party. Plus, this is Dringo
> we're talking about here. It's like talking to a brick wall."


1: I've been persuaded into different views multiple times.

2: Nintendo announced the aquisiton of a new first party developer a while ago.

Retro Studio's was reduced, reformed... had new developers and designers hired... now answer to NOA and Nintendo owns everything about them... Nintendo pay the rent of the building, the staff, they publish the games, they decide on what games they make.

Retro Studio's is a part of Nintendo and therefore are a first party developer.

Dig up the old report when Nintendo claimed them as a first party... they never fully owned Rare hence they being a second party.

Memorandum! wrote:
> I've played [...] all those 'wonderful' ones.
> They're crap.


I don't believe you.

Memorandum! wrote:
> I've played Zelda and Metroid and all those 'wonderful' ones.
> They're crap.

I agree with you about Metroid, I just couldn't get into it at all. But Zelda? Zelda's brilliant, I would still have it if someone didn't offer to buy it off me for £30.

omg wtf lol wrote:
> Memorandy is quite right.

You've got great a supporter there Memo. :D

Darwock wrote:
> OK, I'm scanning everything in Metroid Prime, and it's not really
> telling me the story. The story of the planet sure... but why is
> Samus actually there? From the intro it seemed she's chasing that big
> flying dragon thing... but why?!?

Basically, she's run up against Space Pirates before and is always tracking them down. She caught onto Talon 4 and went to investigate.
Simple enough? :-)

Icaruss wrote:
> But, of course, you're all thinking, "Why bother arguing? It
> doesn't really matter if it's 1st or 2nd party. Plus, this is Dringo
> we're talking about here. It's like talking to a brick wall."
>
> Oh well.

I agree.

Go Memo!
Woop!

But, of course, you're all thinking, "Why bother arguing? It doesn't really matter if it's 1st or 2nd party. Plus, this is Dringo we're talking about here. It's like talking to a brick wall."

Oh well.

Dringo wrote:

> A first party are the manufacturers development studios, so Sony,
> Microsoft Games Studio's and Nintendo EAD. Companies that are 100%
> owned by the console developer. And Retro Studio's is owned by
> Nintendo 100%.

"Unlike second-party developers, however, the first-party developer is considered part of the manufacturer, not a separate entity."

Reasons why Retro is second as opposed to first - location; if it was internally owned, it would be a division of Nintendo, and therefore physically a part of one of their HQ. Also, Nintendo funded Retro at first; i.e. Nintendo themselves did not create the devco, it was created independently and then Nintendo started to take interest.

First parties are usually internally formed.