Jump to content
NEurope

jammy2211

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1,081

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jammy2211

  2. Posted

    they own the patent yes but nobody knows nintendo's intensions with it yet.. it's just an idea and until we hear more we don't know.

     

    it's very hard to comment on this until we hear what nintendos plans actually are.. but miyamoto talked about bridging the gap between casual and hardcore...

     

    how is it a bad thing that casuals and hardcore can enjoy the same experience... it may just help the casual and do nothing for us but even then is it a bad thing? we don't HAVE to use it it's there and i'm sure it isn't hard to implant so whose it hurting?

     

    again with mario galaxy we are just guessing... but you're constantly thinking in terms of gameplay.... I really think this is geared towards "what do I do here" situations..as opposed to " this is too difficult ". Nobody knows how nintendo is going to approach that problem yet.

     

    but this will work well for zelda.. lets face it the difficulty in zelda IS the puzzles.. the gameplay was never hard,the bosses were never hard. even for the bosses.. you know those situations where you have no idea how to go about killing the boss.. that;s where this comes in but once you know it's usually easy..

     

    who knows.. i could be wrong because I don't know exactly what it does... but if it goes along the route i think... then I feel it would be a good idea.

     

    I think your post pretty much sums up how I feel for the most part, people really can't tell what this patent is and heralding it as the savior for Nintendo's focus is just silly. We don't know how it's going to be used, what it'll do, where it'll be applied and if it even has anything to do with the next Zelda.

     

    The only thing I think it does tell us is that the games Nintendo used to just make for us, they want to make as accessible to everyone as possible. Whether that's a bad thing, whether it'll effect my enjoyment, we don't know. It does far from inspire my confidence though, albeit my confidence has already been ruined by the simplicity of all of Nintendo's latest output.

     

    So er yeah, dinner time xxx.

  5. Posted

    There's no reason something like this couldn't be applied to other types of games as well. The system also allows you to skip parts you get stuck on so it can really work with almost an type of game. Its not just a hint system for puzzles.

     

    Is no one going to comment about how Nintendo now own the patent, so it's all completely irellevent except for the first party offerings :P.

     

    But yeah, it just sounds stupid to me. I can't believe people have allowed this to turn into such bigger news then it is. For me it just shows where Nintendo's new focus is, and those thinking it'll create better games for 'us' then when Nintendo were creating games just for 'us' are delusional.

     

    To give you an example, imagine applying this to Mario Galaxy. Say they can't do the Luigi Purple coins, how does this help? If it 'shows' them what to do, it doesn't help, cause it's alot more skill based. If it skips the level, then er, what was the point anyway? That's not fun, just going to push people away? It seems pretty much focused around puzzles from where I try and apply what I read in my head.

     

    what saviour? nintendo's games are always of the best quality there doesn't need to be a saviour.. Also calling people nintendo fanboys because they don't agree with your opinion doesn't work either..

     

    Nintendo's latest output for me isn't the high quality I grew up on, maybe it's just me though, I don't know. The only Nintendo game I can still play and not think "Wow this was better when I played xxx" is the true Mario Platformers. They're gaming bliss, but they come once every 5 blue moons.

     

    And what they're saying reeks of fanboy, again just what I picked up.

     

    It is you that is being negative and out of place. There is no reason to doubt nintendo will find a way to make this work.. when has there EVER being a doubt on miyamotos abilities? Why start now ?

     

    I don't like to put anyone on a pedestal and give him my undying support. Hopefully Nintendo will prove me wrong and somehow they'll make this amazing game that everyone can enjoy, but in all honesty, I can't see how they can make a game this accessible to everyone, and make me enjoy more then something just for my tastes.

     

    puzzle game to me is something like bust a move or tetris.. puzzles IN a game is like resident evil(bar for the most part 4) or metroid. Those are very puzzle based games with other elements.

     

    Okay er, thanks for that.

  7. Posted

    on the contrary it would encourage devs to make a game as hard as they want without worrying about alienating non-skilled players.

    this would be perfect in a game like zack and wiki also.

     

    also you don't HAVE to use it.. that's the point it isn't forced.. meanwhile it would provide a better gameplay experience for you.. a more challengin game than the last.

    Actually it'll encourage devs to do the opposite, cause er, Nintendo own the patent. Lolz.

     

    This is stupid, the fact all the Nintendo fanboys are griping onto this as some sort of ultimate savior of their games just shows your insecurities. There are so many hypocricies about it, I just find it hard to believe the thought process going through some of your minds.

     

    It works with puzzles, yay. It pretty much makes a fragment of Zelda games more accessible, that's about it. For the rest of the Zelda games, and for most of Nintendo's other big games, if they want to 'appeal' to supposed new players, they'll have to make them parts accessible too.

     

    I don't even know if I like the idea of more puzzles in games... otherwise I'd just like, play puzzle games, no?

  9. Posted

    Quite opposite. The important aspect of this patent is that the developer doesn't need to compromise difficulty anymore to gain accessibility. I guess that Miyamoto himself noticed that Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass were too easy, and practically gave no challenge for more seasoned player. With this, overall difficulty can be left high and puzzles made more complex, but the game still stays accessible for less seasoned players. Basically meaning those who don't have neither time or desire bang their head on same location for three hours. They can skip hard parts, gradually learn play better from videos, while still progressing further, and not feeling frustrated. More seasoned players can play game normally.

     

    Furthermore, developers have often complained that it is pointless to do big game with lots of secrets, as only fraction of players will ever see them. With this, more players will see whole game, encouraging also this kind of development. It's a win-win scenario really, if implemented correctly. But it will be very challenging to do so, as it can be overdone, and it requires lots of testing to get it correctly.

    The puzzles can be harder. That's about it. They can't inplement this crazy patent thing into making boss battles more complex, making enemies harder etc. Just harder puzzles. It feels to me like it reduces the scope of puzzles, making them more singular single rooms, as opposed to say the Water Temple from OoT. After all, they can't do this patent thingy for something on that scale, right? :/.

     

    And arn't these developers who complained not able to use it, as Nintendo hold the patent on it :P. I'm sure it'll make more accessible games but I think it only further shows where Nintendo are going, where the next Zelda is going and where my monies is going.

  10. Posted

    oh god that DOESNT work for an adventure game like zelda... when something like metroid prime had a hard mode.. it just makes the enemies harder and lose health more etc.. Zelda fans don't want that we want harder puzzles etc

    .. but besides a hint system.. a hard mode isn't really possible in a zelda game without redoing all the puzzles..

     

    this is a brilliant idea I find. You'll see.

     

    It's something I'll never use, dumbs down Zelda even more and will encourage the developers to make the next Zelda game even more simple.

     

    It just shows that Nintendo are going to try and make even their supposedly more hardcore of franchises as accessible to everyone as they possibly can. Apologies if I don't get excited about that prospect.

  11. Posted

    Also just as an after-thought, if Nintendo patented this and it is the Godly idea that'll save hardcore gaming on the Wii, or whatever, third parties can't use it so it just means we'll see less third party efforts?

     

    I think the patent is rediculous and doesn't mean jack shit, but for the hype some people have convinced themselves its worth, that's an interesting take on it from a different perspective, no?

  12. Posted

    Left For Dead says Hi. The new Banjo Kazooie game is heading to a million too I think, which is far more nishe :/.

     

    But yeah, seems like a moot point to me, they could change the 'style' if they didn't think it had enough appeal. I'd imagine the people who made it a success last gen are the people buying Halo and Resistance this gen.

  14. Posted

    Except for the fact that the PS2 version was a spin off and the Wii version was the actual 360/PS3 game. But watered down so the Wii could handle it. http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/home/954392.html

     

    It is. but if you're not even going to try and sell the game, why bother developing it?

     

    Wow using GameFAQs as a source for anything is fail. From a quick skin read, sounds like marketing spin in its finest, yawn.

     

    And er, for the other part of your post, I don't even know what you're saying. Should companies be risking 10s of millions of dollars on marketing Wii games? Should COD WAW on Wii got a huge expensive marketing campaign.

     

    I really don't get what most of your replies are trying to say, nor how they address any of what I'm saying :/.

     

    His post said "not a PS2 game" but I think he meant "not a PS2 port." That's what I was picking up on.

     

    My 'pick up' was just that he was ignorant to the fact that there was a PS2 version avaliable, thinking it didn't release on the console.

     

    Who knows though? It's hard to interpret anything he says :/.

  15. Posted

    Then, it's also a DS, 360, PS3 and Wii game, too.

     

    I think he meant PS2 port. Not sure if you got that and were being sarcastic, or if it was a genuine misinterpretation.

     

    It was a PS2 port? If not, it was developed in mind of making sure the WIi and PS2 versions could be interchanged to keep costs low.

     

    Erm yeah...

  16. Posted

    Yes, but W@W isn't a PS2 game is it. I can see why a PS2 port might not be worth marketing unless it would sell really well, but obviously time and money was spent getting the game to run on the Wii without toning it down as much as CoD3 was.

     

    I realize I'm no expert on this. But the original argument made quite a few posts back still stands doesn't it. If a game isn't marketed, its not going to sell that well.

     

    W@W is a PS2 game, hence why it er, came out on the PS2 0_o.

     

    And yeah, I agree, a game not marketed isn't going to sell (Unless it's got a strong brand i.e Resident Evil / Mario etc, or has a strong 'core following). However, marketing COD on the Wii, imo, isn't financially viable. The sales return isn't worth the marketing investiment, which would quickly pass $10 million.

     

    To try give you some perspective, I read an article a few years back that a EA PS2 exclusive would have a marketing budget larger then that of the developement budget. Equally relevent, Wii Fit's Marketing campaign has surpassed $100 million.

     

    Morale? Marketing isn't cheap, and it's high risk.

  17. Posted

    But the entire point was to compare it to the PS2. It was an example of how dramatic of a change can be made between generations.

     

    But the Blue ocean will turn to a red one by next generation. Please don't tell me you expect Sony and MS to just stay away from the casual market. The next Blue ocean will be a different market.

     

    IT's too soon to dictate how much of a change has happend though, the only difference is that the Wii is selling to people who didn't buy consoles before.

     

    We'll see what Sony and MS do, they'll dip their toes it in this generation. In all honesty I can see (hope) one of them dropping out and us being left with Nintendo doing their thing on the side and the other catering to the more core gamer people.

     

    But we don't know, and debating 'next gen' is irrelevent and stupid. Why do you keep bringing it up? :/.

  18. Posted

    And why exactly would they develop a game if they're amazing market research told them it wouldn't sell.

     

    It just doesn't make sense to port a game just for shits and giggles. If they're going to spend the money doing this, why not spend the money getting the game to sell.

     

    Because porting a PS2 game costs like, 10% of the developement costs? If we're being generous, that is.

     

    Whereas, a meaningful marketing campaign that you seem to be asking for, can quickly pass $10 million, and easily surpass the developement costs.

     

    You don't seem to have much perspective on this, or knowledge, or idea, or anything. You're like me, when I was younger, and more ignorant 0_o.

  19. Posted

    I disagree. Its quite obvious what they're trying to do. It all adds up if you think about it properly.

    Erm Wut.

     

    I would say there are 3 main types of gamers. Casual, Mainstream, Hardcore. Hardcore can be divided into multiple categories, Fanboy, Multi-console, Single Console, ect. And Nintendo does know that we're the ones who've kept them alive and they know they may need us again in the future if another company manages to steel away the casual market. They know they need to keep their fans interested as well as try and get other hardcore gamers to support them as-well.

     

    Wow, that sounds just like the sort of market analysis major publisher need to be using. I think I need to repeat it, but er, erm, wut?

     

    Look at Sony. They went from one generation being the market leader in terms of sales and they had a firm grasp on both the Casual and Mainstream market, to Nintendo stealing away the casual, and MS stealing away the Mainstream gamers, and now there are rumors about them shutting down their games division. Nintendo has always had the support of their fans, they know their fans are the ones who keep them alive in harder times.

     

    But really, the PS3 is doing well if you factor in more then just comparing it with the PS2. It depend how you look at it, I'm sure sony expected better, but for all their stupid decisions and major overlooks, PS3 is still performing well for a $400 console.

     

    While I'm sure Nintendo will be keen to hold onto their fans, I see no real reason for them to focus or care about us. We're a tiny spec in the blue ocean avaliable to them now.

  20. Posted

    Believe me. They don't need to market GH:WT.

     

    Wii owners aren't just casual's who don't give a crap about anything that doesn't have a Wii Prefix in the title. There is a huge audience for games like this on the Wii. Like I said before, there are lots of hardcore gamers who only have a Wii. There are also a lot of young fathers of children who own Wii's who might pick something like this up for after the kids go to bed if they knew about it. Sure, its not as big an audience as on the 360. But it is enough that it would sell better if people knew about it.

     

    And this market analysis is based off of what? The idea you've built up in your head because it suits your vision of the Wii?

     

    Compare that with the market research EA and Acitivision pay Millions of dollars to obtain and it seems a bit, lacking substance? I'm of the opinion that companies like Activision and EA who over the years have expanded into the giants we know them today, and more then capable of making the right decisions in making money, who are we to say otherwise?

     

    I don't even doubt these audiences you say are on the Wii exsist, however I do believe they're far from financially viable for any company to invest into and not even worth bothering compared to trying to cash in on the 'fitness' market Wii Fit opened up or the Minigames market Carnival Games and Game Party are pioneering.

  21. Posted

    You know. I have this odd feeling you're still going to buy the next Zelda.

     

    Would you not buy a DVD/BD just because it had special features you would never watch? No, you would buy it and just ignore the special features and watch the movie.

     

    With this, you would buy it for the game and not bother with the hint system. This is a feature that is added to the game. Its not going to take away from the game if you don't use it.

     

    I will buy the next Zelda, I'm a sucker for Nintendo. I don't deny that.

     

    At the same time, if it goes the way I see the series going, I'll be disappointed by the experience and ultimately left wanting. I'd be delighted to see Nintendo prove me wrong, but all this patent says to me is the next Zelda is going to be Twilight Princess full equiped with an in-game hint system (That is of course, if I take the opinion this patent is going to make any difference at all).

     

    I think the realisation that what I want Nintendo to do and strive for isn't the same as the direction they're heading it. I've come to terms with that and I guess that's why I've got these strong views on the subject now, hopefully I'll be proven wrong. Currently, I doubt that.

  22. Posted

    Yes, but its designed to make hardcore games accessible to casual players without making them too easy for hardcore players.

     

    But what sets the public image. If the 360 Had a game like Wii sports as a launch title and the Wii had a game like Halo or gears of war in the first year, the consoles would have different images.

     

    Look back at this new patent and read my first paragraph. They're trying to get both audiences. The casual market can be satisfied with the games of 1 or 2 teams, and Nintendo has more than 1 or 2 teams. Only 1 or 2 of them are developing casual games. They have a huge number of other teams that are working on hardcore games and bridge titles. Just because most of these teams released their games in 2007 or early 2008 and there wasn't really all that much coming out for late 2008 doesn't mean that these teams are sitting around playing Brawl. Most Nintendo major Nintendo games take a few years to come out. Nintendo are targeting the hardcore just as much as the casual crowd.

     

    You don't have a clue what that patent means, I don't, you don't, no one does. It's just some pretty Zelda themed pictures and a long description up for interpretation which ultimately will be forgotten and make no difference on our experience of gaming. Give it a week and the page will be rotting in the fourth page of this forums listings.

     

    As for Nintendo targeting the "hardcore", I disagree, as it doesn't make any sense. I think for your definition of casual and mainstream gamer you should add a third, which is the Nintendo gamer. Those who swear by Nintendo, kept them alive during the N64 and GameCube days (Allowing such hits as Mario KArt: DD and Smash Bros MElee to surpass 6m sales). Those are who Nintendo wants to keep, while putting less focus on and ultimately alienating further.

     

    It just seems kind of sad that a Nintendo fan such as yourself is turning to the next console to hope for the games he'd like to play and craves to see. Nintendo HAS changed their focus and don't care about 'us' as much as they did, it turns out alot of the previous "Nintendo gamers" dig the new focus and enjoy the benefits it reaps. Just don't get carried away with this idea they'll still care about their fans of old, now that they've found a much larger and lucurative market.

  24. Posted

    I know its not literally like I said, and it will probably take more than 1 game, but in general a company is going to try and make money off of what they are able to. I don't think the Wii HD is necessarily going to be a super casual console. If you look at a recent patent by a certain gaming legend, you will understand what I mean. A console is judged by its first few major selling games. They are what people will associate with the console. This is why we never see major shifts mid generation.

     

    Is this the patent that pretty much takes the most hardcore of games, and makes them accessible to the casual and expanded audience? Thus, making the Wii appeal more to a casual audience?

     

    I just don't get what you're saying, software doesn't make the huge difference you're making out imo, it's much more down to marketing, price, and just public image.

     

    Wii HD will be the super casual console for one reaosn, cause the Wii was a stupidly huge success with teh casuals. They'll still go after the Nintendo fans and whatever else but it's clear where Nintendo's real revenue generator lies.

  25. Posted

    You don't get it guys.

    (Well, I didn't get it too until my brother explained to me)

     

    Supposedly, if they have this feature, they can make the games as hard as they want, and still have the Casuals loving it, due to the modes they created just for them?

     

    Don't you get it? We could receive the best hardcore game ever, AND STILL HAVE SOCCER MOMS BUYING IT.

     

    Genius

     

    Edit: This of course, if Nintendo uses its full potential, otherwise, it will be just another feature to put in the box.

     

    So you could have AN EASY MODE AND A HARD MODE!?

     

    REVOLUTIONARY

×