How much can nostalgia affect our view of a game?

That's cool and all but no one really takes things from nintendo. Obviously the core gameplay from 26 years ago is another thing, but their innovations from the present within the genre (what's left of it anyway) aren't used at all. Hell I'm surprised MM beat nintendo to a side scrolling 3d platformer. Unless of course one of their handheld games did that, but I don't even know.GD1551

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"] Braid, LittleBigPlanet and Super Meat Boy are evolutions on a 26 year old formula. The rest of the industry has a long way to catch up to where Nintendo is in terms of platformers.GreySeal9

That's cool and all but no one really takes things from nintendo. Obviously the core gameplay from 26 years ago is another thing, but their innovations from the present within the genre (what's left of it anyway) aren't used at all. Hell I'm surprised MM beat nintendo to a side scrolling 3d platformer. Unless of course one of their handheld games did that, but I don't even know.

So what?

Progessiveness/=/influence.

They can go hand in hand sometimes, but they are not the same thing.

Well obviously most of the platforming devs don't consider the things to be good since they don't use them.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]That's cool and all but no one really takes things from nintendo. Obviously the core gameplay from 26 years ago is another thing, but their innovations from the present within the genre (what's left of it anyway) aren't used at all. Hell I'm surprised MM beat nintendo to a side scrolling 3d platformer. Unless of course one of their handheld games did that, but I don't even know.foxhound_fox

Yeah it does mean they aren't relevant. Why have an innovation if no one else is going to use it? Also please define "modern standards" in terms of the gaming industry? I find it ironic you defend nintendo and then talk about pushing gaming forward. This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.

Yeah it does mean they aren't relevant. Why have an innovation if no one else is going to use it? Also please define "modern standards" in terms of the gaming industry? I find it ironic you defend nintendo and then talk about pushing gaming forward. This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.

GD1551

-Says Nintendo's innovations don't count because others aren't copying them

-Says Nintendo isn't pushing gaming forward

I forgot. Unless you make a CoD clone, you're holding back gaming :roll:

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

That's cool and all but no one really takes things from nintendo. Obviously the core gameplay from 26 years ago is another thing, but their innovations from the present within the genre (what's left of it anyway) aren't used at all. Hell I'm surprised MM beat nintendo to a side scrolling 3d platformer. Unless of course one of their handheld games did that, but I don't even know.

GD1551

So what?

Progessiveness/=/influence.

They can go hand in hand sometimes, but they are not the same thing.

Well obviously most of the platforming devs don't consider the things to be good since they don't use them.

That's one of the most baseless assumptions I've ever seen. So why would you use the word "obviously" when you have no evidence of that. You act like it is some kind of unshakable logic when there's no indication that's the truth whatsoever.

Maybe they just want to do their own thing? Or maybe they don't have the talent to pull those things off?

If reviewers find these things to be the pinnacle of the genre, why would other developers find them to be "not good"? You really think that developers like Insomniac look at what Nintendo did with SMG and say, "LOL that sucks! Let's just make a game with more pedestrian level design!" They probably just think what they are doing with Ratchet is good enough and don't want to copy Nintendo.

And like I said, Sonic Colors did take cues from SMG.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="GD1551"]That's cool and all but no one really takes things from nintendo. Obviously the core gameplay from 26 years ago is another thing, but their innovations from the present within the genre (what's left of it anyway) aren't used at all. Hell I'm surprised MM beat nintendo to a side scrolling 3d platformer. Unless of course one of their handheld games did that, but I don't even know.GD1551

Yeah it does mean they aren't relevant. Why have an innovation if no one else is going to use it? Also please define "modern standards" in terms of the gaming industry? I find it ironic you defend nintendo and then talk about pushing gaming forward. This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.

Because it improves the experience? :?

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

Yeah it does mean they aren't relevant. Why have an innovation if no one else is going to use it? Also please define "modern standards" in terms of the gaming industry? I find it ironic you defend nintendo and then talk about pushing gaming forward. This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.

ChubbyGuy40

-Says Nintendo's innovations don't count because others aren't copying them

-Says Nintendo isn't pushing gaming forward

I forgot. Unless you make a CoD clone, you're holding back gaming :roll:

-Yep please tell me how nintendo's innovations are relevant if the 5 other platformer devs don't bother using them?

-Please tell me how nintendo is pushing gaming forward. You mean waggle? Which does absolutely nothing to enhance the experience of any of their games?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="GD1551"]That's cool and all but no one really takes things from nintendo. Obviously the core gameplay from 26 years ago is another thing, but their innovations from the present within the genre (what's left of it anyway) aren't used at all. Hell I'm surprised MM beat nintendo to a side scrolling 3d platformer. Unless of course one of their handheld games did that, but I don't even know.GD1551

Yeah it does mean they aren't relevant. Why have an innovation if no one else is going to use it? Also please define "modern standards" in terms of the gaming industry? I find it ironic you defend nintendo and then talk about pushing gaming forward. This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.

I'm not even going to make the argument that Nintendo is pushing gaming forward (though SMG is most certainly progressive), but the idea that a new IP=pushing gaming forward is highly flawed.

That's one of the most baseless assumptions I've ever seen. So why would you use the word "obviously" when you have no evidence of that. You act like it is some kind of unshakable logic when there's no indication that's the truth whatsoever.

Maybe they just want to do their own thing? Or maybe they don't have the talent to pull those things off?

If reviewers find these things to be the pinnacle of the genre, why would other developers find them to be "not good"? You really think that developers like Insomniac look at what Nintendo did with SMG and say, "LOL that sucks! Let's just make a game with more pedestrian level design!" They probably just think what they are doing with Ratchet is good enough and don't want to copy Nintendo.

And like I said, Sonic Colors did take cues from SMG.

GreySeal9

It's quite obvious since they don't bother using them and grats sonic colours (the sonic team who couldn't make a good game after their last 6 attempts) takes cues from SMG.

-Yep please tell me how nintendo's innovations are relevant if the 5 other platformer devs don't bother using them?

-Please tell me how nintendo is pushing gaming forward. You mean waggle? Which does absolutely nothing to enhance the experience of any of their games?

GD1551

-Because it doesn't fit into their game maybe?

-Please tell me how Sony and Ms are pushing gaming forward. Sony made their own waggle clone, and Microsoft introduced that abomination known as Kinect.

This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.GD1551

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

Yeah it does mean they aren't relevant. Why have an innovation if no one else is going to use it? Also please define "modern standards" in terms of the gaming industry? I find it ironic you defend nintendo and then talk about pushing gaming forward. This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.

GD1551

-Says Nintendo's innovations don't count because others aren't copying them

-Says Nintendo isn't pushing gaming forward

I forgot. Unless you make a CoD clone, you're holding back gaming :roll:

-Yep please tell me how nintendo's innovations are relevant if the 5 other platformer devs don't bother using them?

-Please tell me how nintendo is pushing gaming forward. You mean waggle? Which does absolutely nothing to enhance the experience of any of their games?

You can say innovations are not relevant, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Like I said, there's any number of reasons that developers might not want to copy what Nintendo did with SMG.

Also, as I've told you time and time again, Sonic Colors did take some cues from SMG.

Whether motion control enhances the experience or not is subjective, but I find it kind of contradictory that you insist that for an innovation to count, other people have to copy it, yet you dismiss motion control, which the other two companies have tried hard to copy.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

That's one of the most baseless assumptions I've ever seen. So why would you use the word "obviously" when you have no evidence of that. You act like it is some kind of unshakable logic when there's no indication that's the truth whatsoever.

Maybe they just want to do their own thing? Or maybe they don't have the talent to pull those things off?

If reviewers find these things to be the pinnacle of the genre, why would other developers find them to be "not good"? You really think that developers like Insomniac look at what Nintendo did with SMG and say, "LOL that sucks! Let's just make a game with more pedestrian level design!" They probably just think what they are doing with Ratchet is good enough and don't want to copy Nintendo.

And like I said, Sonic Colors did take cues from SMG.

GD1551

It's quite obvious since they don't bother using them and grats sonic colours (the sonic team who couldn't make a good game after their last 6 attempts) takes cues from SMG.

You can say "it's obvious" 'till you're blue in the face (which is what people with no evidence or substantiation do), but until you show evidence, your argument holds no water. Like I said, there's any number of reasons they might not copy SMG, and your reason makes less sense than all of them.

Now that you've been proven wrong about no companies taking cues from SMG, you're trying to distract from that by bringing up the irrelevant issue of Sonic Team's quality.

But it's interesting to note that Sonic Colors took cues from Mario Galaxy and actually got good reviews!

You can say innovations are not relevant, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Like I said, there's any number of reasons that developers might not want to copy what Nintendo did with SMG.

Also, as I've told you time and time again, Sonic Colors did take some cues from SMG.

Whether motion control enhances the experience or not is subjective, but I find it kind of contradictory that you insist that for an innovation to count, other people have to copy it, yet you dismiss motion control, which the other two gamemakers have tried hard to copy.

GreySeal9

I never dismissed motion controls as nintendo's innovation I merely stated it doesn't push gaming forward since they do not enhance the games even if you find it subjective. it's quite obvious not a single one of these games would have lost any quality with a controller and that is not subjective.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]This is the same company that rides the success of their 4 main franchises to death.foxhound_fox

Which is exactly what you are doing since you ignored every other part of my post and focused on this part which is true.

1. Nothing Nostaligic in the Wario Games for me. (cause I didn't really play a whole lot of the WarioWare or Land Titles when I was a kid)
2. Animal Crossing isn't Nostaligic to me. (I play it a lot, but that's a little bit more recent than youth)
3. Nothing for Metroid. (started playing it this generation.)
4. New Super Mario Bros. Wii gives me a HUGE flash back to Super Mario World for some reason. (Nostalgia)
5. Super Mario Galaxy games only give me hints of SunShine and 64DS. (Little Nostalgia, but not a whole lot.)
6. Mario Party 8 has failed to hit me like Mario Party 2. (Nostalgia I guess, but not a good one)
7. Ocarina of Time 3D made me love Ocarina of Time more. (Nostalgia)
8. Pokemon Silver just had me, Listening to the Winds of a New Beginning again just got to me. (Hard Core Nostalgia)

I guess my point is that not every Nintendo Game gives me Nostalgia.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You can say innovations are not relevant, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Like I said, there's any number of reasons that developers might not want to copy what Nintendo did with SMG.

Also, as I've told you time and time again, Sonic Colors did take some cues from SMG.

Whether motion control enhances the experience or not is subjective, but I find it kind of contradictory that you insist that for an innovation to count, other people have to copy it, yet you dismiss motion control, which the other two gamemakers have tried hard to copy.

GD1551

I never dismissed motion controls as nintendo's innovation I merely stated it doesn't push gaming forward since they do not enhance the games even if you find it subjective. it's quite obvious not a single one of these games would have any quality with a controller and that is not subjective.

Protip: saying "it's quite obvious" does not make your argument stronger. It just highlights that you have no evidence.

Also, How is that not subjective? You're giving your opinion about quality, which is always subjective as it is a value judgment.

And also, you're contradicting yourself again. If you say that the games would not have quality with a controller, then you're kind of admitting that there's something about the motion controller that gives the game a semblance of quality.

It would help your argument more to say that the games would be just as good without motion control. Which wouldn't be a bad argument since SMG 1 and 2 would be just as brilliant without motion control.

Still, many players feel that motion control enchance the shooting in Metroid Prime 3.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You can say innovations are not relevant, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Like I said, there's any number of reasons that developers might not want to copy what Nintendo did with SMG.

Also, as I've told you time and time again, Sonic Colors did take some cues from SMG.

Whether motion control enhances the experience or not is subjective, but I find it kind of contradictory that you insist that for an innovation to count, other people have to copy it, yet you dismiss motion control, which the other two gamemakers have tried hard to copy.

GreySeal9

I never dismissed motion controls as nintendo's innovation I merely stated it doesn't push gaming forward since they do not enhance the games even if you find it subjective. it's quite obvious not a single one of these games would have any quality with a controller and that is not subjective.

Protip: saying "it's quite obvious" does not make your argument stronger. It just highlights that you have no evidence.

Also, How is that not subjective? You're giving your opinion about quality, which is always subjective as it is a value judgment.

And also, you're contradicting yourself again. If you say that the games would not have quality with a controller, then you're kind of admitting that there's something about the motion controller that gives the game a semblance of quality.

It would help your argument more to say that the games would be just as good without motion control.

I didn't type a word in you will find it in my edit, which was basically saying what your last line was.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You can say innovations are not relevant, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Like I said, there's any number of reasons that developers might not want to copy what Nintendo did with SMG.

Also, as I've told you time and time again, Sonic Colors did take some cues from SMG.

Whether motion control enhances the experience or not is subjective, but I find it kind of contradictory that you insist that for an innovation to count, other people have to copy it, yet you dismiss motion control, which the other two gamemakers have tried hard to copy.

GD1551

I never dismissed motion controls as nintendo's innovation I merely stated it doesn't push gaming forward since they do not enhance the games even if you find it subjective. it's quite obvious not a single one of these games would have lost any quality with a controller and that is not subjective.

It totally is subjective.

Some people think that the shooting wouldn't be as good in Metroid Prime 3 without motion control.

Can you prove them wrong with facts? If you can't, it's subjective.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You can say innovations are not relevant, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Like I said, there's any number of reasons that developers might not want to copy what Nintendo did with SMG.

Also, as I've told you time and time again, Sonic Colors did take some cues from SMG.

Whether motion control enhances the experience or not is subjective, but I find it kind of contradictory that you insist that for an innovation to count, other people have to copy it, yet you dismiss motion control, which the other two gamemakers have tried hard to copy.

GreySeal9

I never dismissed motion controls as nintendo's innovation I merely stated it doesn't push gaming forward since they do not enhance the games even if you find it subjective. it's quite obvious not a single one of these games would have lost any quality with a controller and that is not subjective.

It totally is subjective.

Some people think that the shooting wouldn't be as good in Metroid Prime 3 without motion control.

Can you prove them wrong with facts? If you can't, it's subjective.

Probably for that one game, but SMG and the rest won't be affected.

Nostalgia has a huge affect on the games i played. Otherwise i would never buy remakes of games like Pokemon Soulsilver or SM64DS

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

I never dismissed motion controls as nintendo's innovation I merely stated it doesn't push gaming forward since they do not enhance the games even if you find it subjective. it's quite obvious not a single one of these games would have lost any quality with a controller and that is not subjective.

GD1551

It totally is subjective.

Some people think that the shooting wouldn't be as good in Metroid Prime 3 without motion control.

Can you prove them wrong with facts? If you can't, it's subjective.

Probably for that one game, but SMG and the rest won't be affected.

I agree that SMG and most games wouldn't be effected, but if somebody argued that SMG would be worse without motion control and you couldn't prove them wrong only using facts, it would still be subjective, which it is.

"Is nostalgia a tool to exploit or is it just a cheap cop out?" It's both because it's the same thing. Graphics are the only thing getting remarkably better. Stories have gotten better than game play. But wish there were games that try something different story wise. Instead of it all being, "Look were different. See new improved graphics!" Same linear story :|... yay. :cry: