[QUOTE="young80s"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]They stole potential profits buy infringing upon intellectual property What profits? Who is going to watch their movie and therefore not buy Zelda games? What the hell? It has nothing to do with your opinion on whether or not it actually affects profits, it has to do with whether or not Nintendo deems it a threat to the image of their property. If they feel that it could negatively affect the image of their property and even possibly even hurt sales then its completely fair gameTo play devil's advocate, what did they steal such that it was no longer in Nintendo's possession?
clicketyclick
young80s' forum posts
[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]
So it's wrong when theft is stopped?
You're saying we shouldn't be happy that they stopped them from stealing?
You're supporting the theft?
GabuEx
To play devil's advocate, what did they steal such that it was no longer in Nintendo's possession?
They stole potential profits by infringing upon intellectual property[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]
[QUOTE="JLF1"]
Why are people happy about this?
Don't Nintendo fans feel any shame when they basically defend the big heartless, yes heartless, corporation that would gladly sell you all as slaves if they could?
It's one thing to recognize why Nintendo did it but to actually be happy about it?clicketyclick
So it's wrong when theft is stopped?
You're saying we shouldn't be happy that they stopped them from stealing?
You're supporting the theft?
T-roll harder? Obviously he doesn't consider it to be theft.
There are far more controversial homages paid to LoZ. For example, in The Simpsons Game, Homer dresses up like Link and goes on a LoZ adventure. Even down to the same move-sets as link. And that actually was a game made for profit and published by EA.
One question to all the people who are glad about this? Do you or have you ever used LoZ images or resemblances (i.e. in your drawings, writings, as your avatar image, signature image, or in your blog or profile?) If so, don't be hypocritical by saying "they should have asked permission first to use Nintendo's copyrighted characters!"
low profile copy right infringement is safe. But regardless, it is completely within Nintendo's right to stop someone from abusing their intellectual property. They make are allowed to make a business decision on whether the infringement hurts or helps their property grow. It makes perfect sense to stop someone from damaging your image through theft. Small time stuff such as images in blogs and profiles are more on the line of free advertisement. And its not like they sued them which they probably could have, they took minimal steps to stop it.edit: (this probably says it better, its from the fan website)
Hey, everyone. We just wanted to let you know that Dec. 31 was the last day that The Hero of Time was available for viewing. We came to an agreement with Nintendo earlier this month to stop distributing the film. In the spirit of the holiday season they were good enough to let us keep the movie up for you to watch and enjoy through the end of 2009, but not past 2009. We understand Nintendo's right to protect its characters and trademarks and understand how in order to keep their property unspoiled by fan's interpretation of the franchise, Nintendo needs to protect itself — even from fan-works with good intentions.
This has been quite an adventure for us and we have a real sense of peace bringing the project to a close. Between the screenings and the online release many of you were able to see the film and we hope to not have only inspired those of you that live, breathe and dream Zelda but we also hope to have inspired all of you aspiring filmmakers out there! Thank you again for all your patience with the project and we hope you had as much fun watching our movie as we did making it. Thanks for all your wonderful messages of encouragement and support! I'm sure our next project will be right around the corner! No, it's not Majora's Mask : )
nodoes it have online multi?
U_Got_Boyd
[QUOTE="young80s"]good online infrastructure may = better online experience, but having achievements does nothing to make online infrastructure better. Also I am very critical of nintendos online, it hurts them a lot, but achievements once again are nothing more than a distraction in that area. If you actually read ANY of my comment you would realize I am not arguing against online, im not even saying that achievements would hurt gaming. Im saying their is no incentive to include it for Nintendo because it won't make them any more money. Adding achievements does not magically make online better, it takes an effort separate from anything else to make achievements (albeit a small effort) and theres no reason a company would want to do it. Besides, how are you going to talk about "mindless assumptions and then throw down the "Nintendo fanboy" bull. Who says I am a Nintendo fanboy? I like some of their games, I think they have a good developing staff, and I think that their company is good. I also like 360 games and happen to be playing borderlands. I think in many ways the 360 is far superior. But enough about that. I'd keep buying games as long as their good and achievements really won't make a game bad or good. I actually prefer to play with my friends in the room but i will agree it is far superior to be able to play online because you can do it any time. I'd rather have the option of both Also, how are you going to talk about proportionality with shovelware when you don't have any numbers and are pretty much just guessing. The way to look at this is imagine you are a developer who wants to make a quick cash-in with low development costs. The 360 costs more to develop for and has less chance of someone picking up your game (both because of the casual base on the wii and because the 360 has sold far less). The wii has a small developing costs, a casual base and currently the stigma of having shovelware being very sellable on the wii. Its a no brainer. As a result any marginally intelligent developer will make their shovelware for the wii. I hope that you see past your previous assumptions in your post and that you don't go and tell me to Prove to you my idiocy.
KiliK14
Just so you know... I didn't post numbers because 'shovelware' is subjective. But for your information, I DID look up numbers and they're quite depressing... I'll post them if you want.
*sighs* I love it when people say 'If you actually read my post...' Right back at you. I never said you were arguing against online, infact I addressed your issue of sales. If you actually read any of my comment, that's what it was about. :roll:
Having an achievement system DOES require a good online infrastructure - or atleast better than what Nintendo has to offer. An achievement system means that you can look at the achievements of others on leaderboards and view their gaming history on their gamertag (or whatever the console uses) to check out the achievements they have acquired on different games. Nintendo can't do this because of their crap online infrastructure that requires friend codes to do anything. An online achievement system means that Nintendo would have to DITCH the friendcodes and employ a more truly online-play-against-randoms infrastructure. If anyone's played online, they will most probably agree that playing against randoms and shooting them in the face is fun. You can't do that to randoms when you need to acquire friend codes in order to play with them.
So here was my point.. that you missed. An achievement system means Nintendo needs to improve their online infrastructure. Improved online infrastructure means that Nintendo *will* have better online capabilities. Better online capabilities = increased sales.
How do I know this? Well, at the moment Nintendo has lost potential sales from me because I'm unimpressed with their online infrastructure. Had Nintendo had better online infrastructure I'd be more inclined to buy their games. Crap online = less sales. Good online = more sales.
My evidence is myself. So either, I'm right about good online infrastructure increasing sales... or you're talking to a figment of your imagination. Take your pick.
I argue from a sales standpoint because its the only one that matters when you are considering whether it will happen or not. I answered the original question but here it is again, I do not think that achievements add or subtract from games so I don't care if they add it or not. I am just pointing out that no one here has claimed to play games based on whether they have achievements or not so it can't be that big a deal. This is important because you and a couple others are making it sound like one while claiming that people don't buy games for the achievements enough to make a difference. If your claim is true, why is this a failing of Nintendo? Their job is to sell. If something doesn't sell more, why do it? You can argue that they have disappointed you a little but clearly it hasn't made any real difference and wouldn't make any real difference if they have achievements or notSo arguing from a sales standpoint aye?What you fail to understand is that adding achievements will not stop people buying a game, but it WILL encourage others who would otherwise NOT have bought a game, to buy a game. Once again, my evidence is myself... so either I'm right or you're talking to a figment of your imagination.Just to make it more clear... I'm not arguing that achievements in themselves will greatly increase sales, but rather the infrastructure required to have an achievement system will increase sales. i understood your point, you are just missing mine. one big point i made was that they do not need achievements to have good online. they need good online to have achievements. see how that works? You have the relationship backwards and used yourself as an example (im not even going to go into whats wrong with using yourself), But you never say that you would buy a game because they added achievements only that you were disappointed with the online WHICH IS, ONCE AGAIN, A SEPARATE PROBLEM. you can have good online without achievements, in fact, achievements do nothing too get you to have better onlineyoung80s
clearly you read but i wasnt clear enough, and if you have the shovelware numbers go ahead and post, i already said that it really has nothing to do with proportionality so that point is moot anyways
[QUOTE="Burning-Sludge"]
You don't understand that...
- you are in a minority here. because of the number of people with a Wii as their only console, correct
- records and cosmetic awards are not the same thing. nowthat's just being picky. records can certainly be considered superficial
- most gamers don't need to be carrot and sticked into playing games. who said they did? achievements can be something to do AFTER beating the game
- a universal cosmetic award system...
- promotes lazy game design. you can't back that up. :roll:
- is not good or helpful to all game genres. "almost all" isn't good enough for you?
- You do seem to be obsesed with cosmetic awards.You do seem to besatisfied with mediocrity. (yeah, I can toss some insults too)
GamerForca
@young80s.. I still don't understand why you're arguing from a sales standpoint. You can't play sales.
I argue from a sales standpoint because its the only one that matters when you are considering whether it will happen or not. I answered the original question but here it is again, I do not think that achievements add or subtract from games so I don't care if they add it or not. I am just pointing out that no one here has claimed to play games based on whether they have achievements or not so it can't be that big a deal. This is important because you and a couple others are making it sound like one while claiming that people don't buy games for the achievements enough to make a difference. If your claim is true, why is this a failing of Nintendo? Their job is to sell. If something doesn't sell more, why do it? You can argue that they have disappointed you a little but clearly it hasn't made any real difference and wouldn't make any real difference if they have achievements or not[QUOTE="young80s"]No, they'd stay on the wii because it has a huge customer base compared to the other platforms. They would still be super lazy and make terrible games. The 360 still has shovelware, just not as much because it hasn't sold enough. An achievement system would do absolutely nothing to change Nintendos current standing the only difference would be that this thread wouldn't be here. It wouldn't improve sales, game quality, internet quality, or anything really. Thats why there is no need for nintendo to do it. Im sorry if it upsets people but it clearly hasnt stopped you from buying nintendo products so why should they/I really care. I don't mind if they do include it because it wouldn't change anything for me. But I don't see Nintendo adding something that doesn't benefit them in the slightestKiliK14
First: I have no idea about actual numbers (shovelware is subjective), but I imagine the ratio of 360 to Wii shovelware would be greater than 1:5 - the Wii is not outselling the 360 by the same factor. The numbers don't add up. The amount of bad titles on the 360 to bad titles on the Wii is hugely disproportionate.
Mindless assumptions yet again... contrary to what you think you know about me, the last game I bought for the Wii was Smash Bros. Brawl, when it released here in Australia in June 2008. So, here I am; the first specimen of a gamer who was a 90's child loving both the N64 and the Gamecube and being UTTERLY disappointed by the Wii.
An achievement system for the Wii would mean Nintendo would need better online infrastructure which would result in better online multiplayer experience... do NOT tell me that it wouldn't increase sales. You clearly have no idea about the current trends in the gaming industry - offline play is being phased out and online play is dominating.
Look at reviews of The Conduit for example... it was praised for its online and PANNED for its single player campaign.
The defining feature of the highest selling Xbox 360 games is clearly the online capabilities... games such as Halo 3, Gears of War 1 and 2 and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare did NOT sell because of their single player campaigns. Get your head out of the sand... achievement systems require good online infrastructure. Good online infrastructure = better online experience. Better online experience = higher sales. The numbers speak for themselves. I'm sorry Miyamoto, but gaming with friends in the lounge room doesn't top gaming with friends around the world.
Note: I didn't say that Nintendo has crap sales.. I'm saying Nintendo can benefit from including an achievement system. Will Nintendo fanboys like yourself stop buying Nintendo products if it incorporated a good idea such as an achievement system? Please say yes. Prove to me your idiocy.
good online infrastructure may = better online experience, but having achievements does nothing to make online infrastructure better. Also I am very critical of nintendos online, it hurts them a lot, but achievements once again are nothing more than a distraction in that area. If you actually read ANY of my comment you would realize I am not arguing against online, im not even saying that achievements would hurt gaming. Im saying their is no incentive to include it for Nintendo because it won't make them any more money. Adding achievements does not magically make online better, it takes an effort separate from anything else to make achievements (albeit a small effort) and theres no reason a company would want to do it. Besides, how are you going to talk about "mindless assumptions and then throw down the "Nintendo fanboy" bull. Who says I am a Nintendo fanboy? I like some of their games, I think they have a good developing staff, and I think that their company is good. I also like 360 games and happen to be playing borderlands. I think in many ways the 360 is far superior. But enough about that. I'd keep buying games as long as their good and achievements really won't make a game bad or good. I actually prefer to play with my friends in the room but i will agree it is far superior to be able to play online because you can do it any time. I'd rather have the option of both Also, how are you going to talk about proportionality with shovelware when you don't have any numbers and are pretty much just guessing. The way to look at this is imagine you are a developer who wants to make a quick cash-in with low development costs. The 360 costs more to develop for and has less chance of someone picking up your game (both because of the casual base on the wii and because the 360 has sold far less). The wii has a small developing costs, a casual base and currently the stigma of having shovelware being very sellable on the wii. Its a no brainer. As a result any marginally intelligent developer will make their shovelware for the wii. I hope that you see past your previous assumptions in your post and that you don't go and tell me to Prove to you my idiocy.[QUOTE="young80s"]
not having the highest selling system is whats filtering out lazy developers
KiliK14
And if the Wii had implementation of an achievement system as a pre-requisite... where would the lazy developers go? They can either continue being lazy and find another console, or they can stop being lazy andimprove the quality of their games.:roll:
No, they'd stay on the wii because it has a huge customer base compared to the other platforms. They would still be super lazy and make terrible games. The 360 still has shovelware, just not as much because it hasn't sold enough. An achievement system would do absolutely nothing to change Nintendos current standing the only difference would be that this thread wouldn't be here. It wouldn't improve sales, game quality, internet quality, or anything really. Thats why there is no need for nintendo to do it. Im sorry if it upsets people but it clearly hasnt stopped you from buying nintendo products so why should they/I really care. I don't mind if they do include it because it wouldn't change anything for me. But I don't see Nintendo adding something that doesn't benefit them in the slightest[QUOTE="Burning-Sludge"]
You don't understand that...
- you are in a minority here.
- records and cosmetic awards are not the same thing.
- most gamers don't need to be carrot and sticked into playing games.
- a universal cosmetic award system...
- promotes lazy game design.
- is not good or helpful to all game genres.
- You do seem to be obsesed with cosmetic awards.
KiliK14
So... please explain how you came to the conclusion that:
- EVERY Wii owner has voiced his/her opinion on an achievement system and their opinions can NEVER be changed
- Records (which are of numerical value) and 'cosmetic awards' ('cosmetic' meaning they hold no physical value, but rather a representation in visual form) are different
- Gamers who like achievement systems are 'carrot and sticked' into playing games - achievements are achievable...
- "A universal cosmetic award system promotes lazy game design"? If anything it promotes innovation, variety and quality gaming.This probably isn't the greatest example, but how much shovelware is there on the 360 in comparison to the Wii? By the looks of it, the prerequisite of an achievement system seems to be filtering out the lazy developers... call me crazy...
- Achievement systems are detrimental to a game genre... you've got me here... encouragement is BAD! Does it ruin the atmosphere of a game environment? Quick Fix: ability to turn the notices off.
Log in to comment