The Bard Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 Yeah, that's my point though, it's all legacy stuff, Mario Kart on Wii and 3DS we're absolutely joyless, banal experiences. Brawl paid lip service to the superficial concept of Smash Bros as a menagerie of Nintendo's shitty old characters, but not the substance of Melee as an actual, well formed fighter. We'll get the Zelda and the Metroid (the last of which they somehow managed to fuck up utterly), but they almost always feel too safe. The fact is, in the past, their games never felt like shovelware, but now that Nintendo have a new business model, it feels like they're throwing out enough to keep the hardcore market on the treadmill, while their real core market (the casual crowd) are who they are actually trying to win over.
Fierce_LiNk Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 Yeah, that's my point though, it's all legacy stuff, Mario Kart on Wii and 3DS we're absolutely joyless, banal experiences. I didn't like MKWii, but I can see that they at least tried to mix it up and change it. The best one for me was the one on the DS and I would actually have appreciated if they had kept that the same but transferred it into the home console format. I don't really see the problem in "legacy" stuff, though. It's their franchise, and it's not like they're putting it out every year. It's clear that there is some progression between each game, but some of the choices being made seem to be bad choices. (imo) They've taken the series online and it's evolved beyond a simple single-player experience. It's nice that they've added stuff like being able to go underwater, it opens up new possibilities. What I actually think they'd benefit from is refining some of their ideas and releasing another one in the next few years, a better one, rather than having to wait an entirely new generation. Brawl paid lip service to the superficial concept of Smash Bros as a menagerie of Nintendo's shitty old characters, but not the substance of Melee as an actual, well formed fighter. We'll get the Zelda and the Metroid (the last of which they somehow managed to fuck up utterly), but they almost always feel too safe. I know your opinion on Brawl and Other M, but I'd have to disagree with you. Brawl actually felt a lot more manageable to play. Whereas, at times, Melee was a bit too crazy and "light". The characters seem to have more weight. I really like the game and they packed in so much content that I find it hard to dislike it. I don't really go for the whole "technical" fighting stuff that you go for, neither have I ever played any of the Smash Bros games in that way. It's always been an opportunity for me to smash Pokemans and Peach in the face with your mates. That's never changed for me. As for Other M, we could have a whole thread to discuss that. I loved near enough everything about it and found it very memorable. Also, it was just so incredibly fun to play. I felt exactly the same as when I played Fusion or Prime or Super for the first time. It's a true Metroid game, whilst being different in its own right. The fact is, in the past, their games never felt like shovelware, but now that Nintendo have a new business model, it feels like they're throwing out enough to keep the hardcore market on the treadmill, while their real core market (the casual crowd) are who they are actually trying to win over. Hmm, everybody has a different opinion on this. My opinion is that I own twice as many Wii games than I ever did Cube or N64, that I think the third party support is better, and that Nintendo managed to re-invent certain franchises really well. Galaxy kicked arse, Epic Yarn is incredible from seeing Ine play it (I'll be on that when she's done) and that there's more than enough there to please different people. If they're willing to give it a go.
dazzybee Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 People slagging off nintendo for "churning" our franchises? How many call of duties, assassins creeds, resistences, bioshocks, even portals and such will we have in-between each zelda, or even main mario game (we got two last generation and that is RARE!). Nintendo have issues but this isn't one of them! And you say Nintendo are too safe, they completely do something different with metroid (TWICE) and you slag them off for ruining it! And same for Smah Bros which you wished was more like Melee etc. Nintendos problems are what Daft says, they have messed up 3DS' hardware and it now needs a revision; they have gone peripheral crazy without supporting them and their inept online strategy. The latter is changing in a big way and quickly (though still just playing catch up) and hopefully the wii u will solve their hardware issues. But churning out software is a bizarre criticism this generation - how many franchises have the provided sequels for this gen?!
Debug Mode Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 Instead of people arguing how many games of a franchise a company is pulling out their ass, they should all just not give a shit. No offence to some of the guys in here, but defending one company or attacking another company for the number of 'rehashes' they publish is all established on bias. Unless you're an investor or some one very high in the ranks of said company, why the fuck should you give a shit? Seriously, it's completely beyond me why people do this. I wish the video games industry was a lot more open so we didn't have to put up with all this software exclusive debate bollocks. I wonder who the real winners would be if one system could play everything rather than hiding behind exclusivity. As much as I usually stick to Nintendo consoles as a safe bet, I don't think Mario would be nearly as popular.
dazzybee Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 I don't care, I've never bashed anyone for regurgitating titles, was just pointing out that nintendo aren't particularly guilty of it this gen. Personally, I'd love Nintendo release a mario galaxy every year (obviously wouldn't, they're amazing because they're so different to each other). The one console idea is a weird one. In one way it's really damaging having so many devices for the 'art' of games to extent, because it's not like films, were make it and in theory EVERYONE can play it; there's a barrier to playing games - do I have the device needed. But then unlike films, there's a huge aspect into controls. Not passive entertainment, how do I play the thing, and it is this which will mean the chances of it happening are slim to none; no unified controller. But to say mario wouldn't be as popular?! It'd be MORE popular They're not successful on Nintendo consoles because of exclusivity (say like De Blob or Epic Mickey) but because they're some of the greatest games developed Surely people on the HD consoles would love to play Mario galaxy 1 + 2 if they could?
Jonnas Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 (edited) On the other hand, how many people had any idea who the Ice Climbers, Pit, Roy or Marth were before playing them in Smash Bros.? They're familiar now, sure, but I don't see how they're intrinsically any more 'worthy' than, say, Tombi, Sir Daniel Fortesque or Kat from Gravity Rush. I'm pretty sure that wasn't the point of the comparison. Sure, Tombi and Daniel Fortesque (who I hope appear in this game) are better, more well known characters than Ice Climbers or Pit (as he was before, anyway) a.k.a. Sony's lesser known characters > Nintendo's lesser known characters. The original point was that Kratos, Drake, Cole, etc. are less iconic characters than Mario, Link or Pikachu. Which is entirely true, only Sonic, Pacman and few others can claim that kind of recognition. That said, I think anything can work in Smash Bros (Snake proves it), so that isn't much of a big deal. I won't slag this game for copying Smash Bros (unlike their previous shameless copies, this one's a lot more sensible), and much less for being a "rip-off", as it is only a rip-off if it's mediocre and/or adds nothing to the original. None of which I can claim to know. As for the current off-topic discussion... I will say that both Bard and dazzybee seem to be bad at debating this subject. Edited April 28, 2012 by Jonnas
Cube Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 I'm pretty sure that wasn't the point of the comparison. Sure, Tombi and Daniel Fortesque (who I hope appear in this game) are better, more well known characters than Ice Climbers or Pit (as he was before, anyway) a.k.a. Sony's lesser known characters > Nintendo's lesser known characters. .... Who?
Jonnas Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 Tombi was an amusing platformer back on the PS1. Caveman hunting cartoony pigs Fortesque is the guy from Medievil (he would be a perfect fit for this game, too) Fortesque is a lot more recognizable than Nintendo's more obscure characters. I may have exaggerated with Tombi, though
Cube Posted April 28, 2012 Posted April 28, 2012 I owned a PlayStation before I owned any Nintendo console (I never had a NES or SNES) and I've never heard of either of those games. On the other hand, I was aware that the games Ice Climbers and Kid Icarus existed. I do remember another old Sony game that could work here: Ape Escape. Plus you're comparing how recognisable games are when there's over 10 years difference between them.
flameboy Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 I owned a PlayStation before I owned any Nintendo console (I never had a NES or SNES) and I've never heard of either of those games. On the other hand, I was aware that the games Ice Climbers and Kid Icarus existed. I do remember another old Sony game that could work here: Ape Escape. Plus you're comparing how recognisable games are when there's over 10 years difference between them. That's really depressing to read when a knowledgeable gamer has never heard of Medievil just shows how much that series has dropped off the face of the earth seemingly never to be revived, when it was such a funny and awesome game...It's more of a dig at Sony than you in any way as I don't blame you for not knowing it. On another note fuck Tombi...
Aimless Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 My original point when bringing those characters up, as I hope was made clear by the paragraphs not quoted, was that having an entirely recognisable — or, ironically, "all-star" — cast doesn't matter so long as you have a handful of names people do recognise. And the names that resonate with others aren't necessarily going to do the same with you, especially the audience of this forum; ultimately this is a Nintendo site, and the vast majority of people are here for that reason. This game is intended for PlayStation fans in much the same way as Smash is for Nintendo fans. There are plenty of people out there who grew up playing Jak & Daxter rather than anything starring Mario, wasted their education playing multiplayer Twisted Metal or for some bizarre reason absolutely love Kratos. Mario's image is iconic, sure, but whether he has actual relevance for an individual is another matter entirely. Just as a point of interest, Sony do have an actual mascot character, but only in Japan: Toro. He does make the odd cameo in the West, but I suppose he was never brought over properly as he would clash with SCEE and SCEA's marketing.
Jonnas Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 Cube: Really? There was a Demo CD that came with the PS1, it included Medievil, Kula World, Tekken 3, among others. I thought it was more widespread. And I recall Medievil getting a fair share of publicity when it came out, too. On the other hand, I had never heard of Kid Icarus or Starfox before Melee. Plus, I only had played a tiny bit of Ice Climbers when I was a kid, by chance. This coming from someone who owned an N64 and regularly played the NES at a friend's house. And I suppose you have a point regarding their age, but the only N64-era games I'd consider more "obscure" would be Mole Mania and...Wave Race? 1080? Excitebike 64? Wario Land or Conker, maybe? Having a small library will do that Unless you mean the big, identifiable franchises, in which case only their current fame should matter, really. Anyway, back on topic, Ape Escape is a good suggestion for this game. I also just remembered Patapon, now that's a game oozing with charm. This has the ingredients to turn out well, really.
The Bard Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 Klonoa would be wicked. One of the most underrated series ever.
Retro_Link Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 (edited) Again though it's a third party character. I think it's fair to say from the fact Sony are scrapping the barrel just to form a starting character roster, that they just don't have the first party characters for this game. The only way for this game to succeed would be to make it a collaboration with 3rd parties. EDIT: Succeed is the wrong word. To have a diverse range of interesting characters that people actually want to use, and that work well together in a game. Edited April 29, 2012 by Retro_Link
Murr Posted April 29, 2012 Author Posted April 29, 2012 Bit off topic but copies of Tombi 1 & 2 are fetching alot of money on eBay. I had Tombi 1 but traded it in YONKS ago. After seeing what they are going for online kinda regretting that. Were the soul reaver/ legacy of kain games PS1(2) exclusives?? Can't remember
Retro_Link Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 Think they might have been on the Dreamcast, sound familiar, but not sure.
madeinbeats Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 OK, this video is from some of the more extremist Nintendo fans out there, but you cannot argue with most of what they're saying. Personally, I think this is an embarrassing move by Sony, and it's so desperate and grabbing I think they will regret ever making it. It's a massive statement that they're done, they're out of ideas, and they're desperate. Sony fans should be embarrassed and should stand up and let Sony know before they sink any lower. Also agree with other comments about Power Stone. That game was legendary on the DC and it's just been sat there going begging ever since. Sony could have took that and made it their own. Who is making decisions at Sony? This is a bad mistake and has more implications than I think people know. Words.. mark'em..
Aimless Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 Oh please, it's no more telling of creative bankruptcy than New Super Mario Bros. 2; every company makes safe bets. If Sony has a problematic future it's far more to do with the bottom dropping out of the TV market and the strength of the Yen. One familiar fighting game — which by all reports is actually very well executed — means bugger all, especially creatively as the company is supporting some of the riskiest games out there at the same time; Journey's a recent example, although if you'd like imminent ones Datura and The Unfinished Swan fit the bill.
heroicjanitor Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 That and the fact I've been waiting for a game like this to turn up for years I'm sure a lot of people want it. I bet the only people who don't want it and wish it didn't exist are Nintendo fanboys who don't have a ps3 regardless.
heroicjanitor Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 Awesome, didn't see those levels at the end there. Can't wait :p
Cube Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 I really don't mind Sony copying Smash Bros. In fact, I also want Microsoft to have a go at it.
Retro_Link Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 I really don't mind Sony copying Smash Bros. In fact, I also want Microsoft to have a go at it.So you want a game where the only selectable fighters are 16 different coloured Master Chiefs? :p
Cube Posted April 29, 2012 Posted April 29, 2012 So you want a game where the only selectable fighters are 16 different coloured Master Chiefs? :p 16 Master Chiefs and Timber the Tiger.
Recommended Posts