I really wish Nintendo would make new BIG IPs.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="OB-47"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] Yes what I said was the truth glad you agree. complete insanity with no back-up.Jakandsig_
I hate to be rude but I actually wasn't talking to you.
You were talking to e I think you wanted to use the word "about". Even then I still win.You make no sense at all.
[QUOTE="meetroid8"]I understand why people say this sort of thing. But the fact is, Nintendo IPs are so diverse, versatile, and above and beyond the large majority of other franchises in terms of quality, that they simply don't need new IPs.Jakandsig_No? I mean did you even realize what you said? I'm not sure. What did I say that was wrong?
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="meetroid8"]I understand why people say this sort of thing. But the fact is, Nintendo IPs are so diverse, versatile, and above and beyond the large majority of other franchises in terms of quality, that they simply don't need new IPs.meetroid8No? I mean did you even realize what you said? I'm not sure. What did I say that was wrong? The whole post.
[QUOTE="meetroid8"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] The whole post.Jakandsig_Okay, care to elaborate? Does Nintendo not have a vast number of diverse franchises spanning many different genres? Do they not have a reputation for consistently developing extremely high quality games? Reputation for extremely high quality games? You mean the ones no one buys? What did Wii owners buy again? I think the thing with you is that you believe Nintendo shouldn;t make a new IP because you think they are bulletproof, they are using the same idea over and over for a reason whether you believe it or not with almst completely unchaged mechanics. That's now quality it's being scared to see a reaction to something new. It's not going to work with the Next Wii BTW I have no idea why they are still doing that after the GC.
Unchaged mechanics....
lol
Super Mario Galaxy is so different to Super Mario Bros or Mario Kart
and yet they are all under the same IP
Reputation for extremely high quality games? You mean the ones no one buys? What did Wii owners buy again? I think the thing with you is that you believe Nintendo shouldn;t make a new IP because you think they are bulletproof, they are using the same idea over and over for a reason whether you believe it or not with almst completely unchaged mechanics. That's now quality it's being scared to see a reaction to something new. It's not going to work with the Next Wii BTW I have no idea why they are still doing that after the GC.[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="meetroid8"] Okay, care to elaborate? Does Nintendo not have a vast number of diverse franchises spanning many different genres? Do they not have a reputation for consistently developing extremely high quality games?OB-47
Unchaged mechanics....
lol
Super Mario Galaxy is so different to Super Mario Bros or Mario Kart
and yet they are all under the same IP
SMG barely changes mechanics from SMG2 and SMG 64. By barely I mean they took M64, they made the levels longer, they shrunk the hub, and they have the same linear **** with almost the same puzzles and the new puzzles aren;t even new they have been done in other games, although they are exceptions. SMG2 had no reason to exist and its score is unjustified. All the Mario karts are broken and they become more broken every game. All 2D SMB type games that aren;t involving Donkey Kong or SMB2 and 3 have the almost exact same idea with the exact same mechanics with barely any differences to allow them to evolve. I see you tried to seperate the Marios and pretend they are different when those same series in the same franchise have barely let Mario ROOM to actually evolve even a LITTLE BIT. In fact, judging by how fast you replied all you probably saw was unchanged mechanics. Ignored everything else around it.
What does it matter if it's "big" or "small"? Xenoblade is an excellent game despite its budget. What a useless criteria.EponiqueBecause they'll make more sequels for it.
Says the guy woth a racthet & clank avatar and sig :roll: The IPs they produce are amazing.The_PacificWhats wrong with Ratchet and Clank?
Because they'll make more sequels for it.[QUOTE="Eponique"]What does it matter if it's "big" or "small"? Xenoblade is an excellent game despite its budget. What a useless criteria.IcyFlamez96
Says the guy woth a racthet & clank avatar and sig :roll: The IPs they produce are amazing.The_PacificWhats wrong with Ratchet and Clank? It actually had changes in its formula for 6 games in a row.
[QUOTE="IcyFlamez96"]Whats wrong with Ratchet and Clank? It actually had changes in its formula for 6 games in a row. Well R&C never really had BIG changes in its formula. What im saying about games like Mario and Zelda and Pokemon is that they make sooo many games for them. I want to see another really big iconic franchise from them that I'll like enough to enjoy the fact that they make like 2000 sequels/spinoffs for it.[QUOTE="Eponique"] Because they'll make more sequels for it.[QUOTE="The_Pacific"]Says the guy woth a racthet & clank avatar and sig :roll: The IPs they produce are amazing.Jakandsig_
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="IcyFlamez96"] Whats wrong with Ratchet and Clank? IcyFlamez96It actually had changes in its formula for 6 games in a row. Well R&C never really had BIG changes in its formula. What im saying about games like Mario and Zelda and Pokemon is that they make sooo many games for them. I want to see another really big iconic franchise from them that I'll like enough to enjoy the fact that they make like 2000 sequels/spinoffs for it. Ratchet and Clank 1 to going commando to Up arsenal, to Deadlocked, to SAC regardless of how bad it is and a little with Size matter but not that much all have major differences that affect the core gameplay while in most cases games like Zelda and Mario do not have anything that will enhance and involve the experience it stays in the same place. Now ratchet and clank NOW well uh.... I mean Nintendo has one good gen and people wonder why certain games barely sold on the GC all of a sudden. 1ST party wise. (other than Brawl and another game I can't remember at the moment.
Nintendo makes new IPs all the time. The problem is that they make such a huge amount of games total, and most of them are based off of previous games. Granted, the wii is probably their weakest console even in this area. The GC was an incredible platform. Lots of amazing, original games
[QUOTE="Demonjoe93"]There's no short supply of childrenBrunoBRSfor some reason, i lol'd at this :lol:
It does sound kinda weird taken out of context doesn't it? :P
for some reason, i lol'd at this :lol:[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="Demonjoe93"]There's no short supply of childrenDemonjoe93
It does sound kinda weird taken out of context doesn't it? :P
i'm picturing a bunch of children in a factory line being boxed and shipped, with a businessman screaming with a deep voice. "GENTLEMEN, THERE SHALL NOT BE A SHORT SUPPLY OF CHILDREN" :P
[QUOTE="1PMrFister"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] Reputation for extremely high quality games? You mean the ones no one buys? What did Wii owners buy again? I think the thing with you is that you believe Nintendo shouldn;t make a new IP because you think they are bulletproof, they are using the same idea over and over for a reason whether you believe it or not with almst completely unchaged mechanics. That's now quality it's being scared to see a reaction to something new. It's not going to work with the Next Wii BTW I have no idea why they are still doing that after the GC.Jakandsig_It's funny that you're accusing him of making insane posts with nothing to back them up when your own posts are incredibly asinine. It's funny you don;t actually wait or read the whole post. It's also funny that the answer back will be completely irrelevant. Like your post.
What's up with the recent influx of incredibly ****, just genuine douchebag mentality low level posters recently?
I know they do have new IPs for Wii but It seems like im the only one tired of the Mario and I never really liked Zelda much. Mario games are fun but every new litle game they announce of it everyone gets all hyped. Nintendo can make good games and I think its time for them to introduce some new good games as big as Mario or Zelda, not exactly to replace them though. Or start making Metroid games again or something. I think the last one was The Other M right?
Well yeah but again I know they do have alot of new IPs for the wii but none of them seem to be as good compared to Mario and Zelda and those. Anyone else agree?
IcyFlamez96
Newsflash Ratchet and Clank is a wannabe sitcom and not a new IP by anymeans. They basically gave a rat a gun, with a talking robot and threw in a Scifi environment...Without Super Mario 64 you would have no Ratchet and Clunk.
See I can diss $ony IPs. As charizard1605 points out Miyomoto will have something big so be quiet.
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="meetroid8"] Okay, care to elaborate? Does Nintendo not have a vast number of diverse franchises spanning many different genres? Do they not have a reputation for consistently developing extremely high quality games?meetroid8Reputation for extremely high quality games? You mean the ones no one buys? What did Wii owners buy again? I think the thing with you is that you believe Nintendo shouldn;t make a new IP because you think they are bulletproof, they are using the same idea over and over for a reason whether you believe it or not with almst completely unchaged mechanics. That's now quality it's being scared to see a reaction to something new. It's not going to work with the Next Wii BTW I have no idea why they are still doing that after the GC. Mario Galaxy 1 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 10 million Mario Galaxy 2 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 6 million Mario Kart Wii - MC score: 83 - Units sold: over 31 million Wii sports resort - MC score: 80 - Units sold: over 30 million SSBB - MC score: 93 - Units sold: over 10 million Twilight Princess - MC score: 95 - Units sold: over 6 million DKCR - MC score: 87 - Units sold: over 5 million Inb4 lolz vgchartz You say that Nintendo uses the same old ideas over and over again? Have you seen any game play like skyward sword? Have you seen any Metroid game play like Other M? Has any other Mario game played like the Galaxy series? How about wii sports/resort? By your standards, how isn't any game a rehash? Do you know what mechanics are? Please tell me you're trolling. I noticed you guys seem to lack a lot of everything. SS, OoT, TP, WW they are the same game. Yes they are. What makes the core gamplay of a game evolve is what they add to it that effects it. That's how games diffriate eachother. Using Zelda, Zelda does not do this. It really doesn;t, and neither does a few other games, I am not exclusively attacking Nintendo titles. Zelda has aboslutely nothing that enhances the actual GAME. They add thing yes, They add new bosses? Ok, they add a few new items? Ok, they add something that can see through wall or w/e ok cool. Now how does that affect the actual game. It doesn't. If I took Pac-Man and took the exact game, added a beach background, and had the lines flash colors is it all of a sudden a different game? If I add more lines so that's it's harder to menuever is it a different game? Let's say you played Pac-man so many hundred of times, the same gamewould make you puke, the above to WILL do that because it;s the same game. The changes given to pac-man arenlt evolving the game. If I took Pac-man, Placed him in a beach colored backgroun with flashing line and you can shoot powerpellets and ghosts now can get them to and you can optionally jump over the ghosts if your fast enough that can actually transfer to another game in the series and would help the game actually evolve. Zelda has not done what I wrote above. The only thing close is motion controls but then again the next Zelda will most likely be using the WiiU controller so that;s not really going to be an evolving control sheme for the gmeplay. Even then it barely did anything, except enhance the combat just a tad. But still the combat still has similar problems all 3D Zeldas have with the combat. But back to the point. SS has added nothing to help the series evolve whether it be minimal or major just like TP did. TP has wolf you say? That's amazing wait, but regardles syour still going to do the same thing the same way so the game is not different it's a distraction so that it can make the game seem less repetitive. Because without that what would TP be? Many games have this same problem now, I mean Uncharted, Gears, FF in some cases, Capcom in general, GTA, Etc. I mean t's just that when you say something like there IPS are bulletprof or they have no reason to change is just plain stupid and actually the kind of thinking with all these HI I CAN DO IT TOO fps games on the damn market. Hey you play as a russian now the game is now completely changes with different core gameplay. Wait, no it's not. In some cases this can be ok, but really why do you think so many first-party games that stayed the same on the GC didn't do well?
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="meetroid8"] Okay, care to elaborate? Does Nintendo not have a vast number of diverse franchises spanning many different genres? Do they not have a reputation for consistently developing extremely high quality games?D4W1L4HReputation for extremely high quality games? You mean the ones no one buys? What did Wii owners buy again? I think the thing with you is that you believe Nintendo shouldn;t make a new IP because you think they are bulletproof, they are using the same idea over and over for a reason whether you believe it or not with almst completely unchaged mechanics. That's now quality it's being scared to see a reaction to something new. It's not going to work with the Next Wii BTW I have no idea why they are still doing that after the GC. Mario Galaxy 1 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 10 million Mario Galaxy 2 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 6 million Mario Kart Wii - MC score: 83 - Units sold: over 31 million Wii sports resort - MC score: 80 - Units sold: over 30 million SSBB - MC score: 93 - Units sold: over 10 million Twilight Princess - MC score: 95 - Units sold: over 6 million DKCR - MC score: 87 - Units sold: over 5 million Inb4 lolz vgchartz You say that Nintendo uses the same old ideas over and over again? Have you seen any game play like skyward sword? Have you seen any Metroid game play like Other M? Has any other Mario game played like the Galaxy series? How about wii sports/resort? By your standards, how isn't any game a rehash? Do you know what mechanics are? Please tell me you're trolling. Look at the top selling games for the Wii, the only game that most likely moved any console and was not just brought to have something esle with the ii or fan service is, Wii Sports Resort, and SMG 1. SMG 1 barely does however, now take the top 10 selling, eh, 15 selling games on the Wii. Now tell me, the Wii sold tons of Software and hardware, but the Software below the top 15 is abysmal in comparisons most games on the Wii do not do well AT ALL. The high quality first-party Nintendo games barely sell compared to the trash at the top by a wide ratio.
[QUOTE="IcyFlamez96"]
I know they do have new IPs for Wii but It seems like im the only one tired of the Mario and I never really liked Zelda much. Mario games are fun but every new litle game they announce of it everyone gets all hyped. Nintendo can make good games and I think its time for them to introduce some new good games as big as Mario or Zelda, not exactly to replace them though. Or start making Metroid games again or something. I think the last one was The Other M right?
Well yeah but again I know they do have alot of new IPs for the wii but none of them seem to be as good compared to Mario and Zelda and those. Anyone else agree?
Newsflash Ratchet and Clank is a wannabe sitcom and not a new IP by anymeans. They basically gave a rat a gun, with a talking robot and threw in a Scifi environment...Without Super Mario 64 you would have no Ratchet and Clunk.
See I can diss $ony IPs. As charizard1605 points out Miyomoto will have something big so be quiet.
it's a new IP. That's as dumb as saying there would be no Crash Bandicoot without Mario 64. Or Spyro. (Spyro was influenced by crash mostly then any other game and that's also where the portals come from.)[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] Reputation for extremely high quality games? You mean the ones no one buys? What did Wii owners buy again? I think the thing with you is that you believe Nintendo shouldn;t make a new IP because you think they are bulletproof, they are using the same idea over and over for a reason whether you believe it or not with almst completely unchaged mechanics. That's now quality it's being scared to see a reaction to something new. It's not going to work with the Next Wii BTW I have no idea why they are still doing that after the GC.Jakandsig_Mario Galaxy 1 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 10 million Mario Galaxy 2 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 6 million Mario Kart Wii - MC score: 83 - Units sold: over 31 million Wii sports resort - MC score: 80 - Units sold: over 30 million SSBB - MC score: 93 - Units sold: over 10 million Twilight Princess - MC score: 95 - Units sold: over 6 million DKCR - MC score: 87 - Units sold: over 5 million Inb4 lolz vgchartz You say that Nintendo uses the same old ideas over and over again? Have you seen any game play like skyward sword? Have you seen any Metroid game play like Other M? Has any other Mario game played like the Galaxy series? How about wii sports/resort? By your standards, how isn't any game a rehash? Do you know what mechanics are? Please tell me you're trolling. Look at the top selling games for the Wii, the only game that most likely moved any console and was not just brought to have something esle with the ii or fan service is, Wii Sports Resort, and SMG 1. SMG 1 barely does however, now take the top 10 selling, eh, 15 selling games on the Wii. Now tell me, the Wii sold tons of Software and hardware, but the Software below the top 15 is abysmal in comparisons most games on the Wii do not do well AT ALL. The high quality first-party Nintendo games barely sell compared to the trash at the top by a wide ratio. According to VGchartz, 132 wii games sold over 1 million units. 37 of which were published by Nintendo. According to VGchartz, 131 PS3 games sold over 1 million units. 26 of which were published SCE.
[QUOTE="IcyFlamez96"]
I know they do have new IPs for Wii but It seems like im the only one tired of the Mario and I never really liked Zelda much. Mario games are fun but every new litle game they announce of it everyone gets all hyped. Nintendo can make good games and I think its time for them to introduce some new good games as big as Mario or Zelda, not exactly to replace them though. Or start making Metroid games again or something. I think the last one was The Other M right?
Well yeah but again I know they do have alot of new IPs for the wii but none of them seem to be as good compared to Mario and Zelda and those. Anyone else agree?
Super_MooRio
Newsflash Ratchet and Clank is a wannabe sitcom and not a new IP by anymeans. They basically gave a rat a gun, with a talking robot and threw in a Scifi environment...Without Super Mario 64 you would have no Ratchet and Clunk.
See I can diss $ony IPs. As charizard1605 points out Miyomoto will have something big so be quiet.
Why are you dissing R&C? I never said it was a new IPStop getting so offended lol
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="D4W1L4H"] Mario Galaxy 1 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 10 million Mario Galaxy 2 - MC score: 97 - Units sold: over 6 million Mario Kart Wii - MC score: 83 - Units sold: over 31 million Wii sports resort - MC score: 80 - Units sold: over 30 million SSBB - MC score: 93 - Units sold: over 10 million Twilight Princess - MC score: 95 - Units sold: over 6 million DKCR - MC score: 87 - Units sold: over 5 million Inb4 lolz vgchartz You say that Nintendo uses the same old ideas over and over again? Have you seen any game play like skyward sword? Have you seen any Metroid game play like Other M? Has any other Mario game played like the Galaxy series? How about wii sports/resort? By your standards, how isn't any game a rehash? Do you know what mechanics are? Please tell me you're trolling.D4W1L4HLook at the top selling games for the Wii, the only game that most likely moved any console and was not just brought to have something esle with the ii or fan service is, Wii Sports Resort, and SMG 1. SMG 1 barely does however, now take the top 10 selling, eh, 15 selling games on the Wii. Now tell me, the Wii sold tons of Software and hardware, but the Software below the top 15 is abysmal in comparisons most games on the Wii do not do well AT ALL. The high quality first-party Nintendo games barely sell compared to the trash at the top by a wide ratio. According to VGchartz, 132 wii games sold over 1 million units. 37 of which were published by Nintendo. According to VGchartz, 131 PS3 games sold over 1 million units. 26 of which were published SCE. Were did Sony even come from? All you did was prove my point look at Sony atm. This also goes on 3DS as well, having only a few games justify buying one while most other hardware is ignored or nt selling well and in the long run that's going to hurt. That's why it doesn;t surprise me with Wii and DS software sales why they are in red water atm. Because the DS had tons of games, especially Nintendo games which along with many thrid-party games themajority did not do well, and most of which only few games massively sold on it.
[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] Look at the top selling games for the Wii, the only game that most likely moved any console and was not just brought to have something esle with the ii or fan service is, Wii Sports Resort, and SMG 1. SMG 1 barely does however, now take the top 10 selling, eh, 15 selling games on the Wii. Now tell me, the Wii sold tons of Software and hardware, but the Software below the top 15 is abysmal in comparisons most games on the Wii do not do well AT ALL. The high quality first-party Nintendo games barely sell compared to the trash at the top by a wide ratio.Jakandsig_According to VGchartz, 132 wii games sold over 1 million units. 37 of which were published by Nintendo. According to VGchartz, 131 PS3 games sold over 1 million units. 26 of which were published SCE. Were did Sony even come from? All you did was prove my point look at Sony atm. This also goes on 3DS as well, having only a few games justify buying one while most other hardware is ignored or nt selling well and in the long run that's going to hurt. That's why it doesn;t surprise me with Wii and DS software sales why they are in red water atm. Because the DS had tons of games, especially Nintendo games which along with many thrid-party games themajority did not do well, and most of which only few games massively sold on it. Sony was there for a contrast. If you're going to say that for Nintendo, you might as well say it for Sony and Microsoft. Wii has the same amount of games as PS3 which have sold over 1 million. I don't see how having almost 100 third party titles selling over 1 million could be considered Bad for third parties. I don't know why you're brining up the DS. It sold 150 million units already, and it's highest selling/top rated games also come from third parties. DS is done. It's the 3DS's turn now. And guess what? The fourth best selling game on the 3DS is a third party title. Keep in mind, it has only released in one region. 3DS Software sales have been dominating charts since the price drop. Same with 3DS hardware. Not only that, the 3DS is outselling the DS in the same time period. The 3DS hasn't even been out for a year yet, how many system driving games do you want it to have? 3 in one year is excellent.
Don't we all. But I doubt it will be "big", but at least outstanding for my liking.
OK, I'll grant that Nintendo has a few new IPs. But I want BIG titles. Even if "Pushmo" (or whatever the hell it's called) is new, it certainly isn't big. I want another game on the caliber of Zelda or Mario. That's real risk, not a puzzle game for a handheld for crying out loud.
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] I noticed you guys seem to lack a lot of everything. SS, OoT, TP, WW they are the same game. Yes they are. What makes the core gamplay of a game evolve is what they add to it that effects it. That's how games diffriate eachother. Using Zelda, Zelda does not do this. It really doesn;t, and neither does a few other games, I am not exclusively attacking Nintendo titles. Zelda has aboslutely nothing that enhances the actual GAME. They add thing yes, They add new bosses? Ok, they add a few new items? Ok, they add something that can see through wall or w/e ok cool. Now how does that affect the actual game. It doesn't. If I took Pac-Man and took the exact game, added a beach background, and had the lines flash colors is it all of a sudden a different game? If I add more lines so that's it's harder to menuever is it a different game? Let's say you played Pac-man so many hundred of times, the same gamewould make you puke, the above to WILL do that because it;s the same game. The changes given to pac-man arenlt evolving the game. If I took Pac-man, Placed him in a beach colored backgroun with flashing line and you can shoot powerpellets and ghosts now can get them to and you can optionally jump over the ghosts if your fast enough that can actually transfer to another game in the series and would help the game actually evolve. Zelda has not done what I wrote above. The only thing close is motion controls but then again the next Zelda will most likely be using the WiiU controller so that;s not really going to be an evolving control sheme for the gmeplay. Even then it barely did anything, except enhance the combat just a tad. But still the combat still has similar problems all 3D Zeldas have with the combat. But back to the point. SS has added nothing to help the series evolve whether it be minimal or major just like TP did. TP has wolf you say? That's amazing wait, but regardles syour still going to do the same thing the same way so the game is not different it's a distraction so that it can make the game seem less repetitive. Because without that what would TP be? Many games have this same problem now, I mean Uncharted, Gears, FF in some cases, Capcom in general, GTA, Etc. I mean t's just that when you say something like there IPS are bulletprof or they have no reason to change is just plain stupid and actually the kind of thinking with all these HI I CAN DO IT TOO fps games on the damn market. Hey you play as a russian now the game is now completely changes with different core gameplay. Wait, no it's not. In some cases this can be ok, but really why do you think so many first-party games that stayed the same on the GC didn't do well?D4W1L4HWhat? What exactly do you want a sequel to do? Are you saying Zelda should just change genres? It's an action adventure game for crying out loud! It's a medieval setting goddammit. It already has an established storyline, it can't just diverge into something else. We had to wait 5 years for a new Zelda game, and what did we get? An entirely ne control scheme. But according to you, because it didn't radically change the formula, it's a rehash. Don't you see how stupid that logic is. According to you, a series should just die off if it doesn't bring in an entirely new concept. You know what? That's what other IP's a for. You want an action adventure FPS? Metroid prime. You want a racer? Mario Kart You want a platformer? DKCR/NSMBW You want a fighter? SSB You want an RPG? Xenoblade You want a action adventure? Disaster day of crisis/other M/Zelda You want A TRPG? Fire emblem. You want a 3D platformer? Galaxy. You want a party game? Mario party/ Wario ware. How much more variety do you want? I'm not saying no to new IP's but it's asinine to deny the quality, quantity and diversity in the first party Wii titles. Didn't even bother to read did you? I never said anything about changing genres or story line, did Ratchet and Clank to going commado change Gameplay or themes or genres? No, youmissed the whole point of allowing the game to evolve. I am not talking about Jak 1 to 2 here, actually read the post. I think you're not getting the simple message.
[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] I noticed you guys seem to lack a lot of everything. SS, OoT, TP, WW they are the same game. Yes they are. What makes the core gamplay of a game evolve is what they add to it that effects it. That's how games diffriate eachother. Using Zelda, Zelda does not do this. It really doesn;t, and neither does a few other games, I am not exclusively attacking Nintendo titles. Zelda has aboslutely nothing that enhances the actual GAME. They add thing yes, They add new bosses? Ok, they add a few new items? Ok, they add something that can see through wall or w/e ok cool. Now how does that affect the actual game. It doesn't. If I took Pac-Man and took the exact game, added a beach background, and had the lines flash colors is it all of a sudden a different game? If I add more lines so that's it's harder to menuever is it a different game? Let's say you played Pac-man so many hundred of times, the same gamewould make you puke, the above to WILL do that because it;s the same game. The changes given to pac-man arenlt evolving the game. If I took Pac-man, Placed him in a beach colored backgroun with flashing line and you can shoot powerpellets and ghosts now can get them to and you can optionally jump over the ghosts if your fast enough that can actually transfer to another game in the series and would help the game actually evolve. Zelda has not done what I wrote above. The only thing close is motion controls but then again the next Zelda will most likely be using the WiiU controller so that;s not really going to be an evolving control sheme for the gmeplay. Even then it barely did anything, except enhance the combat just a tad. But still the combat still has similar problems all 3D Zeldas have with the combat. But back to the point. SS has added nothing to help the series evolve whether it be minimal or major just like TP did. TP has wolf you say? That's amazing wait, but regardles syour still going to do the same thing the same way so the game is not different it's a distraction so that it can make the game seem less repetitive. Because without that what would TP be? Many games have this same problem now, I mean Uncharted, Gears, FF in some cases, Capcom in general, GTA, Etc. I mean t's just that when you say something like there IPS are bulletprof or they have no reason to change is just plain stupid and actually the kind of thinking with all these HI I CAN DO IT TOO fps games on the damn market. Hey you play as a russian now the game is now completely changes with different core gameplay. Wait, no it's not. In some cases this can be ok, but really why do you think so many first-party games that stayed the same on the GC didn't do well?Jakandsig_What? What exactly do you want a sequel to do? Are you saying Zelda should just change genres? It's an action adventure game for crying out loud! It's a medieval setting goddammit. It already has an established storyline, it can't just diverge into something else. We had to wait 5 years for a new Zelda game, and what did we get? An entirely ne control scheme. But according to you, because it didn't radically change the formula, it's a rehash. Don't you see how stupid that logic is. According to you, a series should just die off if it doesn't bring in an entirely new concept. You know what? That's what other IP's a for. You want an action adventure FPS? Metroid prime. You want a racer? Mario Kart You want a platformer? DKCR/NSMBW You want a fighter? SSB You want an RPG? Xenoblade You want a action adventure? Disaster day of crisis/other M/Zelda You want A TRPG? Fire emblem. You want a 3D platformer? Galaxy. You want a party game? Mario party/ Wario ware. How much more variety do you want? I'm not saying no to new IP's but it's asinine to deny the quality, quantity and diversity in the first party Wii titles. Didn't even bother to read did you? I never said anything about changing genres or story line, did Ratchet and Clank to going commado change Gameplay or themes or genres? No, youmissed the whole point of allowing the game to evolve. I am not talking about Jak 1 to 2 here, actually read the post. I think you're not getting the simple message. Okay, answer us this: What exactly should Zelda do to evolve then? What CAN it do without changing its core gameplay? What it can do is give him a new kind of mount, new items and new dungeons to explore. Maybe differernt kinds of mini-games but to the core, theres not much else they can possibly do to change evolve Zelda. Your example with pacman is utterly absurd. Shooting powerpellets and ghost wouldn't evolve the game, it would change the game. What would be the point of it being a sequel? Sequels are supposed to be the same game to the core, thats why people buy a new Zelda game. Zelda gives us new items, new places to explore, new dungeons, heck they gave us a flying mount. There's new puzzles, new enemies. Look at twilight princess (gamecube version) they improved the fighting a lot. They gave you 7 different fighting skills that you learn throughout the course of the game. Ocarina of time had time travel. That's something unique to that game. I don't quite understand what you expect Zelda to do.
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="D4W1L4H"] What? What exactly do you want a sequel to do? Are you saying Zelda should just change genres? It's an action adventure game for crying out loud! It's a medieval setting goddammit. It already has an established storyline, it can't just diverge into something else. We had to wait 5 years for a new Zelda game, and what did we get? An entirely ne control scheme. But according to you, because it didn't radically change the formula, it's a rehash. Don't you see how stupid that logic is. According to you, a series should just die off if it doesn't bring in an entirely new concept. You know what? That's what other IP's a for. You want an action adventure FPS? Metroid prime. You want a racer? Mario Kart You want a platformer? DKCR/NSMBW You want a fighter? SSB You want an RPG? Xenoblade You want a action adventure? Disaster day of crisis/other M/Zelda You want A TRPG? Fire emblem. You want a 3D platformer? Galaxy. You want a party game? Mario party/ Wario ware. How much more variety do you want? I'm not saying no to new IP's but it's asinine to deny the quality, quantity and diversity in the first party Wii titles.simomateDidn't even bother to read did you? I never said anything about changing genres or story line, did Ratchet and Clank to going commado change Gameplay or themes or genres? No, youmissed the whole point of allowing the game to evolve. I am not talking about Jak 1 to 2 here, actually read the post. I think you're not getting the simple message. Okay, answer us this: What exactly should Zelda do to evolve then? What CAN it do without changing its core gameplay? What it can do is give him a new kind of mount, new items and new dungeons to explore. Maybe differernt kinds of mini-games but to the core, theres not much else they can possibly do to change evolve Zelda. Your example with pacman is utterly absurd. Shooting powerpellets and ghost wouldn't evolve the game, it would change the game. What would be the point of it being a sequel? Sequels are supposed to be the same game to the core, thats why people buy a new Zelda game. Zelda gives us new items, new places to explore, new dungeons, heck they gave us a flying mount. There's new puzzles, new enemies. Look at twilight princess (gamecube version) they improved the fighting a lot. They gave you 7 different fighting skills that you learn throughout the course of the game. Ocarina of time had time travel. That's something unique to that game. I don't quite understand what you expect Zelda to do. I think he wants Nintendo to put a gun on Link, turn his view into a first person, put Link in a modern setting. He would still call it a rehash because there's Link in it and the title is still Zelda.
[QUOTE="Jakandsig_"][QUOTE="D4W1L4H"] What? What exactly do you want a sequel to do? Are you saying Zelda should just change genres? It's an action adventure game for crying out loud! It's a medieval setting goddammit. It already has an established storyline, it can't just diverge into something else. We had to wait 5 years for a new Zelda game, and what did we get? An entirely ne control scheme. But according to you, because it didn't radically change the formula, it's a rehash. Don't you see how stupid that logic is. According to you, a series should just die off if it doesn't bring in an entirely new concept. You know what? That's what other IP's a for. You want an action adventure FPS? Metroid prime. You want a racer? Mario Kart You want a platformer? DKCR/NSMBW You want a fighter? SSB You want an RPG? Xenoblade You want a action adventure? Disaster day of crisis/other M/Zelda You want A TRPG? Fire emblem. You want a 3D platformer? Galaxy. You want a party game? Mario party/ Wario ware. How much more variety do you want? I'm not saying no to new IP's but it's asinine to deny the quality, quantity and diversity in the first party Wii titles.simomateDidn't even bother to read did you? I never said anything about changing genres or story line, did Ratchet and Clank to going commado change Gameplay or themes or genres? No, youmissed the whole point of allowing the game to evolve. I am not talking about Jak 1 to 2 here, actually read the post. I think you're not getting the simple message. Okay, answer us this: What exactly should Zelda do to evolve then? What CAN it do without changing its core gameplay? What it can do is give him a new kind of mount, new items and new dungeons to explore. Maybe differernt kinds of mini-games but to the core, theres not much else they can possibly do to change evolve Zelda. Your example with pacman is utterly absurd. Shooting powerpellets and ghost wouldn't evolve the game, it would change the game. What would be the point of it being a sequel? Sequels are supposed to be the same game to the core, thats why people buy a new Zelda game. Zelda gives us new items, new places to explore, new dungeons, heck they gave us a flying mount. There's new puzzles, new enemies. Look at twilight princess (gamecube version) they improved the fighting a lot. They gave you 7 different fighting skills that you learn throughout the course of the game. Ocarina of time had time travel. That's something unique to that game. I don't quite understand what you expect Zelda to do. I never said change EVERY ZELDA. The point is they havene't even tried to do this for damn nearly 10 ormore games. I am once again, talking about simple things that can evolve the core gameplay. Ratchet to ging comando did this in such a simle way and it did a LOT for the series and the CORE gameis still basically similar but with some evolving. No one is sying turn Zelda into smomething esle, Jak went from a Platfomrer adventure game to GTA in the future, that'sNOT what I am talking about. The Pac-ma examplewould not change the game, that wouldbe the change for 2 games then all of a sudden it evolves into a game like Pac-ma world but you are still doing the same thing. bette yet let's usePac-man and all you added to the game is the ability to jump over ghosts? Now later you have a Pac-ma with legs that jumps over ghosts but still the same game, nowit's3D graphics, but you're still doing the same thing. Nothing has changed. Nithing s evolving. However if you added the ability to jump on ghosts, the 3D pac-an could turn into a slightly different concept. Sequels most have something to diffriateeachother from the things previously. Assasincreed II and borhter hood, they added all this outside stuff to brother hood and it was just as broken as 2 they didn;t fix a thing, it played and controlled the same way. While the example is slightly different the point is there. You have to add something to differiate. At least eventually, Zelda hasn;t even TRIED. They aren't the only ones wither though so don;t think I am just attacking Zelda.
[QUOTE="simomate"][QUOTE="Jakandsig_"] Didn't even bother to read did you? I never said anything about changing genres or story line, did Ratchet and Clank to going commado change Gameplay or themes or genres? No, youmissed the whole point of allowing the game to evolve. I am not talking about Jak 1 to 2 here, actually read the post. I think you're not getting the simple message.nchanOkay, answer us this: What exactly should Zelda do to evolve then? What CAN it do without changing its core gameplay? What it can do is give him a new kind of mount, new items and new dungeons to explore. Maybe differernt kinds of mini-games but to the core, theres not much else they can possibly do to change evolve Zelda. Your example with pacman is utterly absurd. Shooting powerpellets and ghost wouldn't evolve the game, it would change the game. What would be the point of it being a sequel? Sequels are supposed to be the same game to the core, thats why people buy a new Zelda game. Zelda gives us new items, new places to explore, new dungeons, heck they gave us a flying mount. There's new puzzles, new enemies. Look at twilight princess (gamecube version) they improved the fighting a lot. They gave you 7 different fighting skills that you learn throughout the course of the game. Ocarina of time had time travel. That's something unique to that game. I don't quite understand what you expect Zelda to do. I think he wants Nintendo to put a gun on Link, turn his view into a first person, put Link in a modern setting. He would still call it a rehash because there's Link in it and the title is still Zelda. Wow so not only did you not understand what we are talking about you didn;t even bother to read the conversation, just trolling. Also, if you actually DID and came to that conclusion you arethe dumbest person so far and should just leave the site altogether. I mean I am actually hoping you were trolling now. Either way, don;t be a jackass.
If Nintendo wants to attract the core gamer with the WiiU they better have some new hardcore IPS. End of story.
phonemug
And what exactly do you consider "hardcore IPs" ? M-rated games? Realistic-looking games?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment