The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Reading the recent retro freaks magazine Games TM the fear that Nintendo have lost it dawned on me. Here was a magazine that criticised everything the Gamecube had to offer, showing SNES games claiming “This is what Nintendo used to be about”. They weren’t anti-Nintendo although definitely pro-X-box they were disappointed as yet another Mario Kart game fails to beat it’s predecessors.
There appears to be two schools of criticisms, one that Nintendo have changed their lead franchises too much (mainly the die-hard fan base) and two that Nintendo are no longer fresh and new (mainly the opposition fans). Both totally contradictory in terms and so one is wrong, well no actually they are both wrong.
In a society obsessed with comparison it is no surprise Nintendo may appear to falter in its new generation. How can you say Super Mario Sunshine doesn’t surpass Super Mario 64? “Easy” I’m told “the game does nothing new, it is shorter and lacks variation”. Eh? Are you trying to tell me that Mario Sunshine does nothing over Mario 64???? Mario 64 was a revolution, a stunning title that started this interactive 3D world and no one can begin to describe the effect this game had on the industry. BUT it wasn’t nearly as good as you remember it, you always look back through rose tinted glasses, games get better as time goes on. Sunshine was easily as fun as Mario 64 was, it may have had no ice level but we had an underwater section, a ghost house section. A lava segment and even a roller coaster level! Despite it being set on an island, which is another sign of Mario progressing from his traditional worlds, the game did consist of far more variety than first discussed. Then there is FLUDD, who is fantastic SIMPLY because of the depth it added to Mario’s own genre. Mario in platforming had a set height and length he could jump, the main challenge was defeating enemies. In Sunshine, Miyamoto invented a device that incorporated a host of new platforming moves and Mario’s weapon as well. It was a VERY good idea; set up with a perfect control system and once again he set up millions of puzzles to work with these new moves. It really was a revolution and a superior title to Mario 64!
But enough about how sunshine surpasses Mario 64 as a stand-alone game. I want to move onto my prime example of The Legend of Zelda. Zelda suffers from something I call give and take syndrome. In order to take the game needs to give. Lets take Ocarina of Time, a game everyone claims to be the best 3D Zelda game. Rubbish the best 3D Zelda game is Wind Waker and that is a fact. Ocarina of Time has the same magic as Wind Waker did, trust me IT DID it felt just as wonderful to play and I know it looks more magical now but compare playing the Wind Waker to playing Ocarina of time and you’ll remember they felt both just as good. But Wind Waker had problems, this is unusual, the sea journeys at times got tiresome, the interaction was very poor and the storyline wasn’t held together too well. But doesn’t a combat system to die for (so beautiful and amazing to control), the worlds best use of cel-shading graphics ever (so amazing) and a level of absolute hilarity make up for it? Doesn’t the ability to fly, the various use of the wind, the new cel-shaded look and the new idea of the sea make this a great example of how sequels should be done? Lets look at Majora’s Mask, doesn’t come close to Ocarina of time they said, and why? Well because of the smaller and less epic filled landscape, the easier dungeons, the crappy saving system and reduced length. But doesn’t the BEST EVER INTERACTION IN A ZELDA GAME make up for that (the 3 day loop is the most ingenious idea to date), doesn’t the gameplay improving and effective mask collecting out match Gold Skultula’s completely? Isn’t the atmosphere the darkest and most daunting in any Zelda game ever? Yes that is right, doing something-new, innovative and amazing means that something has to give in the game. A level of interaction like none other meant the developer was working solidly on that and so the story was reduced. So the interaction could work so well (character doing something different all the time) meant a set number of days were needed and to stop the game becoming too easy the “save anywhere” approach had to be removed…
So lets look at Ocarina of Time, yes it may have be the longest game, the most amazing storyline BUT the enemies were actually rather poor, Hyrule field is big barren and dull, we had to sit through that storyline regarding the 3 Gods TWICE and it was dull the first time and the game at times really felt like a dodgy puzzle game (the water temple)…
Nintendo have not lost it at all. Mario Kart: Double Dash!! is FAR better than Mario Kart 64 and Super Mario Kart. Nintendo have yet to create a masterpiece like they did on the N64 (and oh boy did they create some masterpieces) but they have managed to improve their old masterpieces with new and fresh ideas and take their series’ in other directions. Other than perhaps Metroid Prime Nintendo haven’t created a new game defining moment. This is true, despite their best attempts with Pikmin (give it time). But play the games… and stick with them and the magic is still there… in full force. Just remember the movement from 2D into 3D was always going to be more revolutionary than 3D into 3D… and after all for such a small jump Nintendo have managed to alter their best franchises in the most ingenious of ways.
Dringo.
There appears to be two schools of criticisms, one that Nintendo have changed their lead franchises too much (mainly the die-hard fan base) and two that Nintendo are no longer fresh and new (mainly the opposition fans). Both totally contradictory in terms and so one is wrong, well no actually they are both wrong.
In a society obsessed with comparison it is no surprise Nintendo may appear to falter in its new generation. How can you say Super Mario Sunshine doesn’t surpass Super Mario 64? “Easy” I’m told “the game does nothing new, it is shorter and lacks variation”. Eh? Are you trying to tell me that Mario Sunshine does nothing over Mario 64???? Mario 64 was a revolution, a stunning title that started this interactive 3D world and no one can begin to describe the effect this game had on the industry. BUT it wasn’t nearly as good as you remember it, you always look back through rose tinted glasses, games get better as time goes on. Sunshine was easily as fun as Mario 64 was, it may have had no ice level but we had an underwater section, a ghost house section. A lava segment and even a roller coaster level! Despite it being set on an island, which is another sign of Mario progressing from his traditional worlds, the game did consist of far more variety than first discussed. Then there is FLUDD, who is fantastic SIMPLY because of the depth it added to Mario’s own genre. Mario in platforming had a set height and length he could jump, the main challenge was defeating enemies. In Sunshine, Miyamoto invented a device that incorporated a host of new platforming moves and Mario’s weapon as well. It was a VERY good idea; set up with a perfect control system and once again he set up millions of puzzles to work with these new moves. It really was a revolution and a superior title to Mario 64!
But enough about how sunshine surpasses Mario 64 as a stand-alone game. I want to move onto my prime example of The Legend of Zelda. Zelda suffers from something I call give and take syndrome. In order to take the game needs to give. Lets take Ocarina of Time, a game everyone claims to be the best 3D Zelda game. Rubbish the best 3D Zelda game is Wind Waker and that is a fact. Ocarina of Time has the same magic as Wind Waker did, trust me IT DID it felt just as wonderful to play and I know it looks more magical now but compare playing the Wind Waker to playing Ocarina of time and you’ll remember they felt both just as good. But Wind Waker had problems, this is unusual, the sea journeys at times got tiresome, the interaction was very poor and the storyline wasn’t held together too well. But doesn’t a combat system to die for (so beautiful and amazing to control), the worlds best use of cel-shading graphics ever (so amazing) and a level of absolute hilarity make up for it? Doesn’t the ability to fly, the various use of the wind, the new cel-shaded look and the new idea of the sea make this a great example of how sequels should be done? Lets look at Majora’s Mask, doesn’t come close to Ocarina of time they said, and why? Well because of the smaller and less epic filled landscape, the easier dungeons, the crappy saving system and reduced length. But doesn’t the BEST EVER INTERACTION IN A ZELDA GAME make up for that (the 3 day loop is the most ingenious idea to date), doesn’t the gameplay improving and effective mask collecting out match Gold Skultula’s completely? Isn’t the atmosphere the darkest and most daunting in any Zelda game ever? Yes that is right, doing something-new, innovative and amazing means that something has to give in the game. A level of interaction like none other meant the developer was working solidly on that and so the story was reduced. So the interaction could work so well (character doing something different all the time) meant a set number of days were needed and to stop the game becoming too easy the “save anywhere” approach had to be removed…
So lets look at Ocarina of Time, yes it may have be the longest game, the most amazing storyline BUT the enemies were actually rather poor, Hyrule field is big barren and dull, we had to sit through that storyline regarding the 3 Gods TWICE and it was dull the first time and the game at times really felt like a dodgy puzzle game (the water temple)…
Nintendo have not lost it at all. Mario Kart: Double Dash!! is FAR better than Mario Kart 64 and Super Mario Kart. Nintendo have yet to create a masterpiece like they did on the N64 (and oh boy did they create some masterpieces) but they have managed to improve their old masterpieces with new and fresh ideas and take their series’ in other directions. Other than perhaps Metroid Prime Nintendo haven’t created a new game defining moment. This is true, despite their best attempts with Pikmin (give it time). But play the games… and stick with them and the magic is still there… in full force. Just remember the movement from 2D into 3D was always going to be more revolutionary than 3D into 3D… and after all for such a small jump Nintendo have managed to alter their best franchises in the most ingenious of ways.
Dringo.
Page:
'That Man' wrote:
> Dringo wrote:
> being one-sided though is not a fault but a
> deliberate act.
>
> Or, as I like to call it, 'retarded'.
No one sits on the fence my friend. Unless they're totally dull.
> Dringo wrote:
> being one-sided though is not a fault but a
> deliberate act.
>
> Or, as I like to call it, 'retarded'.
No one sits on the fence my friend. Unless they're totally dull.
Eh? I know I'm one sided.
When I used to post on FOG i even parodied the idea with me being talked to by imaginary Mario's and hiding from my brothers PS2 in my room.
It is a deliberate character. I know my posts aren't perfect I know they have some major problems. but I don't write to win awards anymore so I don't care, being one-sided though is not a fault but a deliberate act.
When I used to post on FOG i even parodied the idea with me being talked to by imaginary Mario's and hiding from my brothers PS2 in my room.
It is a deliberate character. I know my posts aren't perfect I know they have some major problems. but I don't write to win awards anymore so I don't care, being one-sided though is not a fault but a deliberate act.
Dringo wrote:
> Dr Duck I am starting to get tired from you being so stupid.
Lol, classy start :^)
> The reason? Because
> being politically correct and pretending to be objective is just dull
> and a LIE.
And that's the only way you can post without being 'politically correct and dull'?
I'm sure you're capable of better than that.
> If I said I understand that blah blah is shorter, and that Nintendo
> have done a lot of minor upgrades etc... then I would be a liar and
> not leaving much room for a response. The fact is in my eyes shorter
> is better and Sunshine, Kart and Waker havce had major upgrades not
> minor.
There you go, you managed it :^)
> If you honestly think I write posts that are totally one-sided
> because all I want to do is envoke a response then you are wrong. I
> write a one-sided post because I am one-sided and it happens to
> envoke a response.
Well you said it. I honestly don't believe you're being truthful with yourself any more. If you can't acknowledge your faults how are you ever going to improve?
> Get over it for christs sake you aint going to change a thing.
It's a chat forum. It's a bit of a long shot that anything any of us say will mean much.
> You're just being stupid. I used the wrong
> word, boo hoo.
There you go, not so hard huh?
> Dr Duck I am starting to get tired from you being so stupid.
Lol, classy start :^)
> The reason? Because
> being politically correct and pretending to be objective is just dull
> and a LIE.
And that's the only way you can post without being 'politically correct and dull'?
I'm sure you're capable of better than that.
> If I said I understand that blah blah is shorter, and that Nintendo
> have done a lot of minor upgrades etc... then I would be a liar and
> not leaving much room for a response. The fact is in my eyes shorter
> is better and Sunshine, Kart and Waker havce had major upgrades not
> minor.
There you go, you managed it :^)
> If you honestly think I write posts that are totally one-sided
> because all I want to do is envoke a response then you are wrong. I
> write a one-sided post because I am one-sided and it happens to
> envoke a response.
Well you said it. I honestly don't believe you're being truthful with yourself any more. If you can't acknowledge your faults how are you ever going to improve?
> Get over it for christs sake you aint going to change a thing.
It's a chat forum. It's a bit of a long shot that anything any of us say will mean much.
> You're just being stupid. I used the wrong
> word, boo hoo.
There you go, not so hard huh?
Dr Duck I am starting to get tired from you being so stupid.
I wrote a post, a post that, without accepting, understanding or even slightly agreeing with any one elses opinion. The reason? Because being politically correct and pretending to be objective is just dull and a LIE.
The above section, where with a certain amount of die hard belief, is the response of me being "offended" (although that is blatently the wrong word) by the amount of crap about Nintendo.
I then post it on a forum. The reason? So that people who feel the opposite is true, the same feeling i got after reading Games TM, could argue the point. And/or agree.
If I said I understand that blah blah is shorter, and that Nintendo have done a lot of minor upgrades etc... then I would be a liar and not leaving much room for a response. The fact is in my eyes shorter is better and Sunshine, Kart and Waker havce had major upgrades not minor.
If I opt for my accurate one sided opinion then I would be admitting I'm subjective (and we all are) but giving people that think the opposite was true a great oppertunity to vent their disagreement. Those offended by my point of view (still not the right word) should go "oi Dringo no" and we have a debate.
As for presenting it as fact then you are retarded. For starters this is an opinion on an opinion. None of it is fact, so how fact can even come into this I don't know. It is my opinion, it has my name at the side of the bloody post, and this is what I think and here is why I think it. I don't need to state the fact it is an opinion.
If you honestly think I write posts that are totally one-sided because all I want to do is envoke a response then you are wrong. I write a one-sided post because I am one-sided and it happens to envoke a response. I did, once, write a post from a Playstation's fan Point of View and a Nintendo fans point of view. It so didn't work because I was blatently a Nintendo fan and although I tried to be objective I couldn't.
Because I'm not.
Get over it for christs sake you aint going to change a thing.
I know i said offended but lets be honest who is going to be offended by a post about Nintendo. You're just being stupid. I used the wrong word, boo hoo.
I wrote a post, a post that, without accepting, understanding or even slightly agreeing with any one elses opinion. The reason? Because being politically correct and pretending to be objective is just dull and a LIE.
The above section, where with a certain amount of die hard belief, is the response of me being "offended" (although that is blatently the wrong word) by the amount of crap about Nintendo.
I then post it on a forum. The reason? So that people who feel the opposite is true, the same feeling i got after reading Games TM, could argue the point. And/or agree.
If I said I understand that blah blah is shorter, and that Nintendo have done a lot of minor upgrades etc... then I would be a liar and not leaving much room for a response. The fact is in my eyes shorter is better and Sunshine, Kart and Waker havce had major upgrades not minor.
If I opt for my accurate one sided opinion then I would be admitting I'm subjective (and we all are) but giving people that think the opposite was true a great oppertunity to vent their disagreement. Those offended by my point of view (still not the right word) should go "oi Dringo no" and we have a debate.
As for presenting it as fact then you are retarded. For starters this is an opinion on an opinion. None of it is fact, so how fact can even come into this I don't know. It is my opinion, it has my name at the side of the bloody post, and this is what I think and here is why I think it. I don't need to state the fact it is an opinion.
If you honestly think I write posts that are totally one-sided because all I want to do is envoke a response then you are wrong. I write a one-sided post because I am one-sided and it happens to envoke a response. I did, once, write a post from a Playstation's fan Point of View and a Nintendo fans point of view. It so didn't work because I was blatently a Nintendo fan and although I tried to be objective I couldn't.
Because I'm not.
Get over it for christs sake you aint going to change a thing.
I know i said offended but lets be honest who is going to be offended by a post about Nintendo. You're just being stupid. I used the wrong word, boo hoo.
Dringo wrote:
> When i say offended i meant disagreed, as in offended that i could be
> so wrong...
>
> In the wrong context I know. More disagree with my point of view.
Come on, that's stretching it a bit far, huh? We all see exactly what you mean, and phoney word games don't change that one bit. If you'll admit it to yourself then you can make a qualified decision. It doesn't matter if you admit it to anyone else, they can make up their minds from what they've read.
> The post's job is to belittle their point of view, that is the point.
So you can't disagree without belittling peoples' opinions? Or is this another special 'context'?
> I find their point of view wrong so expect me to say so and say why.
Opinions. 'Right and wrong' doesn't work that way.
> When i say offended i meant disagreed, as in offended that i could be
> so wrong...
>
> In the wrong context I know. More disagree with my point of view.
Come on, that's stretching it a bit far, huh? We all see exactly what you mean, and phoney word games don't change that one bit. If you'll admit it to yourself then you can make a qualified decision. It doesn't matter if you admit it to anyone else, they can make up their minds from what they've read.
> The post's job is to belittle their point of view, that is the point.
So you can't disagree without belittling peoples' opinions? Or is this another special 'context'?
> I find their point of view wrong so expect me to say so and say why.
Opinions. 'Right and wrong' doesn't work that way.
When i say offended i meant disagreed, as in offended that i could be so wrong...
In the wrong context I know. More disagree with my point of view.
The post's job is to belittle their point of view, that is the point. I find their point of view wrong so expect me to say so and say why.
Those who believe said point of view to be right, hobble along and go "oi, Dringo, no... that point is rubbish and here's why"
= Debate.
In the wrong context I know. More disagree with my point of view.
The post's job is to belittle their point of view, that is the point. I find their point of view wrong so expect me to say so and say why.
Those who believe said point of view to be right, hobble along and go "oi, Dringo, no... that point is rubbish and here's why"
= Debate.
'Not pretending to share someone else's point of view' is fine.
Belittling their point of view to evoke a response is going a tad far.
*rummages*
Dringo wrote:
> I
> write a one-sided report and people, offended by my point of view,
> argue it.
Belittling their point of view to evoke a response is going a tad far.
*rummages*
Dringo wrote:
> I
> write a one-sided report and people, offended by my point of view,
> argue it.
Dr Duck can we just get it straight. It sounded like fact, basically I motivated so much subjection behind it, it does appear like fact.
But you somehow know it is not.
It is like the debate about violence on TV, no one thinks it is wrong because THEY think THEY will go and kill someone it is always someone else will kill someone.
You seem to think that by me presenting it with enough motivation (or make it seem like fact) therefore means someone is bound to see it as fact. But no one, and i mean no one, on this forum is stupid enough to take my opinion as gospel.
And more to the point the entire topic is about an "opinion" a general opinion is emerging that Nintendo may have lost it, I disagree with said opinion...
Why does it matter if I present it like fact or not?
The reason I write in my subjective, one sided way, is because I am honest, there is no point in me pretending to share other peoples points of view because I don't. This also enables a more lively and interesting response from the topic.
It isn't a matter of are you honest or envoking a response... I am doing both.
But you somehow know it is not.
It is like the debate about violence on TV, no one thinks it is wrong because THEY think THEY will go and kill someone it is always someone else will kill someone.
You seem to think that by me presenting it with enough motivation (or make it seem like fact) therefore means someone is bound to see it as fact. But no one, and i mean no one, on this forum is stupid enough to take my opinion as gospel.
And more to the point the entire topic is about an "opinion" a general opinion is emerging that Nintendo may have lost it, I disagree with said opinion...
Why does it matter if I present it like fact or not?
The reason I write in my subjective, one sided way, is because I am honest, there is no point in me pretending to share other peoples points of view because I don't. This also enables a more lively and interesting response from the topic.
It isn't a matter of are you honest or envoking a response... I am doing both.
As Dringo has already stated, he doesn't have to say, "In my opinion" to everthing to make it a statement of his own opinions. The fact he wrote it should be enough.
As for using my example to compare to what Dringo's been saying - that is exactly what I did - compare - hence my mentioning of it. He hasn't been telling people not to have opinions - he's been encouraging them to express their opinions.
As for using my example to compare to what Dringo's been saying - that is exactly what I did - compare - hence my mentioning of it. He hasn't been telling people not to have opinions - he's been encouraging them to express their opinions.
Edgy wrote:
> Just like what I have read in local papers about a small minority
> of Muslims saying the
> Britian should stop selling Hot Cross Buns and shouldn't send
> Christmas Cards or have Christmas Decorations.
> That's insulting. Its telling us we shouldn't have our own beliefs.
You could use precisely that analogy to compare to Dringo telling other people they shouldn't have their own beliefs.
Which is more or less how I see it, and why I do find it insulting.
> Just like what I have read in local papers about a small minority
> of Muslims saying the
> Britian should stop selling Hot Cross Buns and shouldn't send
> Christmas Cards or have Christmas Decorations.
> That's insulting. Its telling us we shouldn't have our own beliefs.
You could use precisely that analogy to compare to Dringo telling other people they shouldn't have their own beliefs.
Which is more or less how I see it, and why I do find it insulting.
Page: