Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 He's a shadow of his former self. That is without doubt! Starfox not being as good as it should and using poor design choices, Project Guard and Project Giant Robot looking exceedingly lame, not seeing the fun in Splatoon, not wanting online in Pikmin 4, not seeing the point in doing F-Zero unless they can do some lame gimmick with it. I'd much prefer he stayed away from games these days... I never thought I'd say that at one point. That's bullshit and you know it. Star Fox Guard is ridiculously fun. Star Fox is a good game and doesn't have "poor design choices". You may not like the controls, granted, but that doesn't mean the game has poor design. Come on. Miyamoto is a bit like Arsene Wenger, holding on for too long and living on past reputation. Jesus Christ. You guys are ridiculous. Just because of one mis-step, you're all about jumping on him. Good Christ. I can't really think of much he's done since the late 90's that's benefited their core franchises to be honest. I think the biggest issue with Miyamoto is the rubbish he comes out with in interviews. Mostly because Miyamoto's position has changed to supervisory rather than making the stuff himself. He is in charge of essentially all projects at Nintendo. If a game has been made by Nintendo since the late 90s, he has had a heavy hand in it.
Dcubed Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) Dude, other developers are producing vast open world games, just as ambitious, and packed ful of content. Rockstar manage to get a couple of these out each gen. and with huge story DLC or online multiplayer. Those games aren't Zelda though and don't have nearly the same level of interactivity that a Zelda game offers. You can't really interact with the environment in those games like in Zelda, you don't have the intricate level, dungeon and enemy designs that Zelda games are known for. And they also don't really take the same handcrafted approach that Zelda does in how they are made (much of those games is precedurally generated). Quite frankly, they're built in a very different way that isn't compatible with how a Zelda game works (and their development focus is entierly different; they're not trying to achieve the same things that Zelda games do). A game of this scale, with the kind of interactivity and gameplay that Zelda is known for is completely unprecedented. And while I'm at it, I'm not convinced that Nintendo will be able to pull it off either, even with 5-6 years of dev time. If people moaned about Twilight Princess' world feeling "empty", then they're gonna hate this game... Edited May 3, 2016 by Dcubed
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) It's not bullshit at all @Serebii, don't be so deluded! Star Fox Guard looks as ridiculously fun as that sodding Mobile Strike game or whatever it's called that Arnie is advertising... it looks pants! Designing a control scheme that is counter-intuitive and has a "steep learning curve", as some describe, is a terrible design choice... that's a matter of fact! At some point through the Wii's life-cycle Miyamoto lost what made him such a good designer, all for the sake of wanting to push/find a new gimmick! Edited May 3, 2016 by Kav
Zechs Merquise Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 I know he's produced games since the late 90s. My point is that he hasn't produced anything that revolutionary or genre defining, at least for core gamers, for quite some time. His game design concepts seem a bit out of touch. Apologies for not being clear. Well if the games I've listed aren't 'revolutionary' enough or genre defining enough, please list some games that are more genre defining and revolutionary than the three listed below: Super Mario Galaxy 97.64% review average Super Mario Galaxy 2 97.35% review average Metroid Prime 96.33% review average Considering Mario Galaxy 2 has the third highest review average of any game ever and he produced that in 2010, what you are saying just falls to pieces in the face of scrutiny. It's like you are rewriting history to suit an agenda. And yes, we can all say that the Wii U hasn't been his greatest success to date, no one could argue that it has been a smash hit or his finest hour, to suggest that one man can literally be expected to produce games at the quality of Metroid Prime, Ocarina of Time and Galaxy without occasionally missing the mark is ludicrous - he is a man, not some kind of deity.
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 It's not bullshit at all @Serebii, don't be so deluded! Star Fox Guard looks as ridiculously fun as that sodding Mobile Strike game or whatever it's called that Arnie is advertising... it looks pants! Designing a control scheme that is counter-intuitive and has a "steep learning curve", as some describe, is a terrible design choice... that's a matter of fact! At some point through the Wii's life-cycle Miyamoto lost what made him such a good designer, all for the sake of wanting to push/find a new gimmick! Ah, so it "looks" pants. So you haven't actually played it then. Star Fox Zero's control scheme is also not "counter-intuitive". It's actually really intuitive. It only has a steep learning curve if you fight it and keep trying to treat it as a standard one. It's not a terrible design choice, it's a different design choice. He also doesn't just want to find a new gimmick. He just doesn't want to try new stuff, which is something this industry sorely needs and outside of indies, isn't getting.
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) I've never eaten shit, I don't need to, I know it won't be for me. Also, don't get all high and mighty when you yourself post thoughts on how things look... Figured I'd make a separate thread for this, since it'll be for sale separately (Japanese price 1500 Yen so probably £15) https://www.nintendo.co.jp/wiiu/bwfj/index.html This game looks like ridiculous fun. You can even create stages to face against your friends You're so full of it Serebii! Edited May 3, 2016 by Kav
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 I've never eaten shit, I don't need to, I know it won't be for me. Also, don't get all high and mighty when you yourself post thoughts on how things look... You're so full of it Serebii! But that's different. You're judging the entire game and then Miyamoto's capabilities based on such a thing. I've now played the game for many hours and find it really fun. It's irrational to judge a person's capabilities based on how it "looks" when this is an interactive medium, not an audio/visual medium.
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) Read my original post again @Serebii, you quoted it after all, I'm judging Miyamoto on a number of things, not just this. So actually, it's not different at all. The more Miyamoto distances himself from Zelda, the better. That's how I feel these days thanks to all those things I mentioned. Edited May 3, 2016 by Kav
Goron_3 Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Well if the games I've listed aren't 'revolutionary' enough or genre defining enough, please list some games that are more genre defining and revolutionary than the three listed below: Super Mario Galaxy 97.64% review average Super Mario Galaxy 2 97.35% review average Metroid Prime 96.33% review average Considering Mario Galaxy 2 has the third highest review average of any game ever and he produced that in 2010, what you are saying just falls to pieces in the face of scrutiny. It's like you are rewriting history to suit an agenda. And yes, we can all say that the Wii U hasn't been his greatest success to date, no one could argue that it has been a smash hit or his finest hour, to suggest that one man can literally be expected to produce games at the quality of Metroid Prime, Ocarina of Time and Galaxy without occasionally missing the mark is ludicrous - he is a man, not some kind of deity. Oh, I didn't realise that Galaxy was a Miyamoto title! I thought he just looked over it as opposed to giving it the OoT/SM64 treatment. I have no agenda dude. You need to calm down, you're getting way to OTT again. I also never claimed he was a deity. Good grief.
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Read my original post again @Serebii, you quoted it after all, I'm judging Miyamoto on a number of things, not just this. So actually, it's not different at all. The more Miyamoto distances himself from Zelda, the better. That's how I feel these days thanks to all those things I mentioned. You were using it as evidence of Miyamoto being "past it". As such, the fact that you haven't played it and are just judging based on looks throws the entire basis of your argument into question. Just how many more of these games have you not actually experienced yourself?
Retro_Link Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) Those games aren't Zelda though and don't have nearly the same level of interactivity that a Zelda game offers. You can't really interact with the environment in those games like in Zelda, you don't have the intricate level, dungeon and enemy designs that Zelda games are known for. And they also don't really take the same handcrafted approach that Zelda does in how they are made (much of those games is precedurally generated). Quite frankly, they're built in a very different way that isn't compatible with how a Zelda game works (and their development focus is entierly different; they're not trying to achieve the same things that Zelda games do). A game of this scale, with the kind of interactivity and gameplay that Zelda is known for is completely unprecedented. And while I'm at it, I'm not convinced that Nintendo will be able to pull it off either, even with 5-6 years of dev time. If people moaned about Twilight Princess' world feeling "empty", then they're gonna hate this game... I think you are vastly overstating the level of interactivity in a Zelda world. I adore Zelda... Ocarina of Time is my favourite game of all time, and the most recent, Skyward Sword, I think is incredible... But Zelda's worlds are not interactive, the majority do not even offer a great deal of freedom when it comes down to it. The worlds are experiential yes, they are beautifully designed... but the objects in that world do not have the physics of an Uncharted, you cannot go anywhere and do anything like a GTA or Xenoblade, you cannot build the world like a MGSV and you don't have the character interactions and dialogue of a Witcher. Whilst we hope the next Zelda will be the first in the series to do these things... I can't think of what current examples you're referring to in the series. Edited May 3, 2016 by Retro_Link
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 It doesn't at all @Serebii, you don't have to play something to be able to form an opinion on something. I know how it plays, I've watched extensive videos, I've read about the different enemies and what they do, how you play the game etc. I don't need to play it! If I knew next to nothing about it then fair enough, but I know well enough to know it's not something I'd enjoy. My big problem with Miyamoto and why I don't want him involved with Zelda is this: He used to create games and IP like Zelda, Mario, Donkey Kong. Games that felt epic to play! Now he creates things like Wii Fit, Wii Music, Nintendoland, Project Guard, Project Giant Robot, Starfox with gimmick controls, no F-Zero unless it has a gimmick. He needs to be kept away from series like Zelda!
Happenstance Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Whilst we hope the next Zelda will be the first in the series to do these things... I can't think of what current examples you're referring to in the series. You can break pots
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 You can break pots And cut patches of grass and lift and throw certain rocks. Amazing, right?!
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) My big problem with Miyamoto and why I don't want him involved with Zelda is this: He used to create games and IP like Zelda, Mario, Donkey Kong. Games that felt epic to play! Now he creates things like Wii Fit, Wii Music, Nintendoland, Project Guard, Project Giant Robot, Starfox with gimmick controls, no F-Zero unless it has a gimmick. He needs to be kept away from series like Zelda! You're equating the term gimmick to be negative. Everything new is considered a gimmick and he doesn't want to do a new F-Zero if it brings nothing new to the table. The only game that you listed which is actually "bad" is Wii Music. Project Giant Robot was also just a tech demo. It's no longer an actual in development game. Wii Fit sold over 70 million units...it helps keep me fit and prevent me getting fat again. I also like how you just ignore other things he has done in the time period such as Pikmin 3 and the various other games he has helped with his input. This narrative that he has lost it is just down-right absurd. Edited May 3, 2016 by Serebii
Retro_Link Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 He also doesn't just want to find a new gimmick. He just doesn't want to try new stuff, which is something this industry sorely needs and outside of indies, isn't getting.Sorry Serebii but that's just not true. Just last month Quantum Break experimented with live-action storytelling. There are countless examples of games continually pushing boundaries forward in terms of multiplayer experiences, visual design, storytelling, world building, controller input, creativity... I could rattle you off a whole list.
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) You're equating the term gimmick to be negative. Everything new is considered a gimmick and he doesn't want to do a new F-Zero if it brings nothing new to the table. The only game that you listed which is actually "bad" is Wii Music. Project Giant Robot was also just a tech demo. It's no longer an actual in development game. Wii Fit sold over 70 million units...it helps keep me fit and prevent me getting fat again. I also like how you just ignore other things he has done in the time period such as Pikmin 3 and the various other games he has helped with his input. This narrative that he has lost it is just down-right absurd. F-Zero: online leaderboards/multiplayer/leagues etc Bad games: that's your opinion, mine is that they're all shit. Pikmin 3: I don't ignore it, I've said it was great but he chose not to put online in which is another bad decision from him (you're giving me more reason to list what's wrong with him). Wii Fit: you can go outside and jog and get fit, not get fat. Me saying him having lost it and wanting him away from Zelda is opinion, justified from my reasoning above and so not absurd. You may disagree but it's still valid. Edited May 3, 2016 by Kav
Dcubed Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) I think you are vastly overestimating the level of interactivity in a Zelda world. I adore Zelda... Ocraina of Time is my favourite game of all time, and the most recent, Skyward Sword, I think is incredible... But Zelda's worlds are not interactive, the majority do not even offer a great deal of freedom when it comes down to it. The worlds are experiential yes, they are beautifully designed... but the objects in that world do not have the physics of an Uncharted, you cannot go anywhere and do anything like a GTA or Xenoblade, you cannot build the world like a MGSV and you don't have the character interactions and dialogue of a Witcher. Whilst we hope the next Zelda will be the first in the series to do these things... I can't think of what current examples you're referring to in the series. Zelda worlds are like giant constructed puzzles. Much like Metroid, the environment is designed to be interacted with both directly (hookshot onto certain points, cut down vines, climb up cliff faces, blow up walls etc) and in-directly ("How the hell do I get up to that upper path?" "There's a path hidden below this bridge, how do I get down!?" "I can't get this thing yet, I have to remember to come back later on when I get a new item"). Even the enemies are basically glorified puzzles in a sense! Those other games you mention simply aren't built in the same way. The world of Witcher 3 for example is basically just a pretty backdrop; you can't really interact with it in any meaningful way. With Assassin's Creed, you can parkour up things, but that's about it; there's no puzzles to solve or anything like in Zelda. Zelda's environments are shall we say, "designed", while the environments in those other games are basically naturalistic environments that you don't really interact with outside of just running and jumping through them really. I don't mean that as an insult, just that Zelda games are unique in that regard (God of War is closer to Zelda in terms of its environment design than any of the other games you mentioned). As such, there's a design process that happens with Zelda's environments that takes a really frickin' long time. And to attempt making a Zelda game on this scale is actually probably complete lunacy. In fact, it's such lunacy that I don't think it's gonna work out that well in the end. The best Zelda games are the ones that exchange scale for density of design (see Majora's Mask and Skyward Sword VS OoT and Twilight Princess for what I mean). I reckon this new game will feel a bit like butter being scraped over too much bread. Edited May 3, 2016 by Dcubed
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Sorry Serebii but that's just not true. Just last month Quantum Break experimented with live-action storytelling. There are countless examples of games continually pushing boundaries forward in terms of multiplayer experiences, visual design, storytelling, world building, controller input, creativity... I could rattle you off a whole list. I disagree about Quantum Break. I don't consider what they did creativity. It's no different to the FMVs of yesteryear and it's not gaming. The industry is obsessed with pushing a/trying to recreate a cinematic experience, and that is a worrying trend. Gaming is not just that. F-Zero: online leaderboards/multiplayer/leagues etc Bad games: that's your opinion, mine is that they're all shit. Pikmin 3: I don't ignore it, I've said it was great but he chose not to put online in which is another bad decision from him (you're giving me more reason to list what's wrong with him). Wii Fit: you can go outside and jog and get fit, not get fat. Adding online is not enough to make a game feel new. Come on. There's a difference between "I don't like this, this isn't for me", and a game being intrinsically bad. Those aren't bad games. They may not be for you, but they aren't bad.
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 He's happy to churn out 2D Mario after 2D Mario with nothing fucking new!
Zechs Merquise Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Miyamoto has been making games since 1979, that’s nearly four decades, and his career has had more hits and genre defining games than any other figure in the history of gaming. He has defined genres then gone on to redefine those same genres years later in a way that no other game designer has ever done. He hasn’t just had a few hits, but has been making household names and GOTY entries since almost the start of his career (Donkey Kong was produced in 1981). He is the genius behind Mario, Donkey Kong and Zelda and has worked on so many classic franchises it would be almost impossible to memorise them all! The man works in a creative medium, and produces games based on different creative briefs. He has made games like Metroid Prime, F-Zero GX and Ocarina of Time. He has made games like Mario, Donkey Kong and Yoshi’s Story. He has made games like Wave Race 64, 1080 Snowboarding and Super Mario Kart. He has also made games like Wii Fit, Nintendogs and Wii Music. Just because he does one thing doesn’t mean he can’t do another. Just because Martin Scorsese directed Goodfellas, does that mean he shouldn’t have made Hugo or Cape Fear? They’re very different films, arguably for different audiences, but all directed by one man. Yet now we have people saying because Miyamoto wanted to make Wii Music he can’t direct Zelda again? What nonsense! Then we come to the expectations and the ridiculous spite that comes from those expectations not being met. No one can consistently produce great creative output year on year, not every project is going to be perfect and not every project is going to please everyone. People have creative visions that don’t quite work out or aren’t realised as well as they hoped for. The man has had a glittering career for nearly four decades – do people honestly believe that there won’t be the odd low point? That at times he won’t have fully realised some of his visions or that projects won’t have always come off as well as he hoped for? But because some of his recent work hasn’t been as perfect as some of his older work it’s time to shut him off from all game development as if he knows nothing at all? The man is the producer on 5 of the top ten most critically acclaimed titles of all time – the last one of these released in 2010! There has been no producer, director or creative supervisor in video game history that has ever matched the greatness of Miyamoto. But now people are ready to claim he is washed up or that he needs to be put out to pasture? What a joke! Do people who work in creative industries not have dry periods, does everyone produce 100% all of the time or have ideas that always work out? The man is a genius, but he is also fallible – because he is human. The way people talk about him, I find it a little bit childish, distasteful and rather disgusting at times considering all that he has done for the industry.
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) He's happy to churn out 2D Mario after 2D Mario with nothing fucking new! Yeah, all of 4 in 10 years on 4 formats. The horror. Also, I might add that each did new things. If it wasn't for the aesthetic, people wouldn't fucking bitch. Edited May 3, 2016 by Serebii
Kav Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Nobody is disputing Miyamoto's pedigree @Zechs Merquise, we're all well aware of what he's done. The reason that, at least, I am saying I want him far from Zelda is because of numerate things he has said in recent more years about game development that interests him and reasons for not making games or leaving features out of games he has made. I don't want him near Zelda because of how he is these days. I'm not disputing his pedigree, but he is no longer what Zelda needs! He's not even interested in developing games like Zelda anymore. Yeah, all of 4 in 10 years on 4 formats. The horror. Also, I might add that each did new things. If it wasn't for the aesthetic, people wouldn't fucking bitch. And how many F-Zero games have we had in that time? TA-DA!
Hero-of-Time Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Good old N-E. Always good for a laugh. I fail to see why people are getting all hot and bothered just because of other people's opinion towards Miyamoto. Does their opinion of him somehow effect how you feel towards him? If so, why is that? If someone doesn't like someone you do, it shouldnt have any impact on your feelings towards said person.
Serebii Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Nobody is disputing Miyamoto's pedigree @Zechs Merquise, we're all well aware of what he's done. The reason that, at least, I am saying I want him far from Zelda is because of numerate things he has said in recent more years about game development that interests him and reasons for not making games or leaving features out of games he has made. I don't want him near Zelda because of how he is these days. I'm not disputing his pedigree, but he is no longer what Zelda needs! He's not even interested in developing games like Zelda anymore. And how many F-Zero games have we had in that time? TA-DA! Maybe if F-Zero games, you know, sold well twe'd have more. Miyamoto has said nothing wrong. So he doesn't want to make cinematic games. So he puts gameplay first over story. I'm fine with that. I play games to play games. If I want a deep story, I'll watch a movie Nothing he has said is of any form of concern. He's not outright making bad games. He's not making bad decisions. He's just not making games for you.
Recommended Posts