• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

How can people not like 'Nintendo Games'?

vasametropolis said:
The people you are referring to have no taste. Or, taste so poor I'd rather not speak to them ever.
Click to expand...

Judging by your posts in this thread, I think it's pretty safe to assume they wouldn't want to talk to you either.

nullref said:
When people say they "don't like Nintendo games", they're probably not saying "I've tried all Nintendo games, and didn't like any of them." More likely, they actually mean "while I've enjoyed some Nintendo games in the past, their current output is less exciting to me than the output of other developers, so I play those games instead". Put that way, it doesn't seem unreasonable.

Most of Nintendo's titles are aimed at an extremely broad audience. Lots of people will naturally find that less exciting than titles aimed at their more specific tastes.
Click to expand...

I think that says it pretty well. That's been my personal experience with Nintendo games anyway. I just don't end up feeling very invested in the story being told, compared to the experiences that other developers are offering.
 
tokkun said:
Mario Galaxy is one of the easiest games I have played in years. I think I fell asleep one time while playing and woke up with 99 lives. I kept wondering when the tutorial levels would be finished all the way up to the end of the game.

I still don't understand why more people didn't have the same complaint, because I don't consider myself to be unusually good at videogames and I like Mario platformers in general.
Click to expand...

You are not alone. I LOVE Mario Galaxy, but 3/4 of that game are too simple to me. The first time I played it I loved the art style, the level design, the controls, the gameplay but it was just too easy. I think that Mario Galaxy 2 is way better, it's not Super Meat Boy, but it's more complex in every aspect. Well, it still gives you tons of 1Ups, but who gives a shit about that?
 
There are a number of great posts in this thread, but to add a thought on the OP:

"How can you not like Nintendo games?" is a not-uncommon sentiment in video games because Nintendo literally is video games to some people. This is more than just blind fanboyism; it's reasonable that Nintendo would represent gaming itself to some because Nintendo is a foundation of gaming post-84 western console game crash.

However, for all that, it's still perfectly reasonable that other people to have no general interest in Nintendo games. Gaming is bigger than Nintendo, and always has been - just as motion pictures are far bigger than say, Walt Disney, for all that Disney is a pillar of motion pictures.

I do think what gets under the skin of some Nintendo fans are overly silly dismissals of Nintendo games, that are structured along the same lines as saying "I hate Pixar and all their movies. I saw Toy Story and it was a dumb cartoon full of talking animals. That's for babies."

Nintendo does seem to be a pretty big target for that kind of thing due to the fact that they are historically placed on a pedestal as being important contributors to gaming as a medium and an industry. Normal people who simply happen to not care for Nintendo tend to get caught in the crossfire between outraged fans and those who actually do have this kind of juvenile chip on their shoulder about Nintendo. "That stupid Nintendo, why is everyone saying they're so great? I hate everything about them and must take them down."
 
I can't imagine not having love for a few Nintendo titles. I don't love them all (Skyward Sword is such a chore to me) but the Metroid Prime series is absolutely masterful and on most days its Metroid Prime 1 vs. Majora's Mask for my favorite game of all time. The Rhythm Heaven , Pikmin, Zelda, and Mario series have all brought me a lot of happiness at one point or another.

Everyone is entitles to their tastes. I just hope that those uninterested in their larger franchises don't neglect to try smaller ones (which I myself haven't done enough of). They cover much too many genres to not find something to like buried in their history.
Falcs00 said:
It's the whole kiddy thing. Not enough mature content. I'm in my late twenties and Nintendo games are like a guilty pleasure for me. I like them probably mostly for the nostalgia since I grew up with Nintendo. But I feel so immature and childish playing them.
Skyward sword felt like such a kid's game, and it was embarrassing playing it in front of my wife.
Not to mention the shitty motion gimmicks. I felt like an idiot sitting there waving my wrist around.
Click to expand...
I actually feel sad when I read stuff like this. Were you enjoying the game? If so why does it matter that it made you feel like kid? That's a feeling most would love to recapture.

And embarrassing? It must suck feeling like you have to maintain some facade by pushing away things that you like (if you do).

I'm 23 and I have a major fear of becoming a person who abandons what they enjoy in order to "grow up":
grownups.png
 
While I own (almost) every system (93 at current count)... I only really care about Nintendo's games. In gaming it is literally all that matters. While i love Bioshock infinite, i'll only play it twice at most, Any Mario/Zelda game I'll replay every few years if not more often. I look down on people who don't like Nintendo, they are not real gamers in my eyes.
 
Well, different tastes it's the obvius answer.

Me, for example, don't like Halo games, or MGS, or Uncharted, or Final Fantasy...
 
Amir0x said:
I am not sure why you wouldn't. The only things that define FPS are if they are in first person and if you shoot things. But every angle of the word, that's what it is. There are FPS with all different types of approaches, and it'd be fair to call Metroid Prime both an action/adventure game AND a FPS, but it is definitely a FPS.

And unlike Mirror's Edge as in Anihawk's comment, shooting IS one of the primary focuses of the game, and in Mirror's Edge you can play through everything without even shooting a single bullet and everything is made to encourage precisely that. Even still, I'd say calling it a FPS is an appropriate qualifier, it's just other things as well.
Click to expand...

Well half-truths are still half-lies :P
Sure, call it a FPS/AA, or a FPAA where your means of killing is to shoot at stuff.
 
I'm dumb in that when I say Nintendo games, I mean primarily Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Pokemon and Kirby games, and there's not too many I enjoy in those. It's especially weird with Zelda and Pokemon, they are the kind of games that I should like but there's just something soooo booring about them.
 
Fancy Corndog said:
If I'm painting with a broad brush, I'd say Nintendo's game's are brilliantly designed but also not aiming to accomplish much. They're 'simpler', but in a way that can easily be construed as good. Some people prefer that, some don't. It's that way to target its demographic, but there's still something appealing to it. Some people just don't get as much out of it though.
Click to expand...

I agree with the bolded. I was willing to give examples but to be frank I don't think I could without a bunch of people getting crazy offended/outraged or dismissive.
 
Amir0x said:
Yeah me too. It's frustrating because Nintendo is so talented and every year with them is like a treadmill... here we go more Mario more Zelda more Metroid and here's one single game with a decent budget that is aimed at hardcore folk but it has the marketing war chest equivalent to a pack of cigarettes.

I just hope Wii U's situation will lead toward them getting really ambitious with their game productions and marketing, but we'll see.
Click to expand...
I doubt it in terms of marketing, although I have seen LM:2 advertised quite a lot recently, but that is sorta a Mario game so I guess it doesn't count. I get the feeling we'll get one or two X style IP's during the Wii U's lifespan (In terms of hardcore appeal), but weather Nintendo will back them like they do their pillar franchises is another matter altogether (And 1 I don't have too much faith in). Nothing to do but wait and see. At least I have my 3DS for Nintendo games/RPG's for now (EO4/SOUL HACKERS/FIXED DEVIL SURVIVOR NOW ATLUS!)
 
Hex said:
As has been said, it is different tastes.
I really think that the op has way too much invested in this.
I mean, I get every Pokemon game that comes out for nostalgia, and because I my gf always gets the opposite one and we play together but every single time I get about half way through and realize that I really have done this before...alot..but I still buy it and still do it and still do every download event and gamestop and toys r us event and dreamworld event and pokewalker when they had it.
I can appreciate the art style and the fun of each new Mario offering, and I will play them with friends but not nearly enough to buy them.
I rocked out on wii sports and wii sports resort, I loved Mario Galaxy. Mario Galaxy 2 was fun but again it did not wow me as much as Galaxy.
I like some of the references in Haunted Mansion, but again I wouldn't buy it so I just play my gf's son's copy now and then but I know I will never finish it because I am already over it.
I am not opposed to "NINTENDOS" games. I still rock my 3DS , I streetpass like a fiend, I make miis.
Nintendo just needs to break out of their comfort zone.
Miyamoto comes off like some wanna be Willy Wonka these days who did not know when to get into the Great Glass elevator , and it is kind of sad.
They have nothing to worry about, a game with the name Mario or Zelda will sell boat loads no matter what and to be honest you will never get a bad game.
Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I really don't have that much invested in this, it's just a curiosity to me because it didn't really make sense. As if to somehow "renounce" any accusations of fanboyism I may get, I actually prefer the Vita's output thus far to that of the 3DS' (though the games on the horizon make it seem like that'll change.)
It's clear to me now at least that ceratin people (Opiate) may not like Nintendo games in general because they tend to appeal to a broader demographic, but as Opiate himself mentioned those who simply claim to not like Nintendo games in general seem to have a mental block. Like I completely understand your position but I doubt you would go out and say you "don't like Nintendo games."
 
BGBW said:
No one will give you a list because they always end up being a waste of time because the requester usually turns around and says "none of those interest me"

I could point out Luigi's Mansion 2 that came out recently but I bet kayos90's bottom dollar you'll tell me that isn't a good game.
Click to expand...

Mate the thread is full of lists. Luigi's mansion 2 demonstrates the problem some will have far better than old games
 
I still love EBA/Ouendan, F-Zero, 2D Metroid, and Advance Wars. Unfortunately, the series I don't care for very much (like Zelda, modern Mario, etc.) are the ones that get the most sequels.
 
Their output ever since the Wii has been rather mediocre. Except SMG.
Luigi's Mansion 2 looks interesting but it seems pretty simple at the same time.
 
Diablos54 said:
I doubt it in terms of marketing, although I have seen LM:2 advertised quite a lot recently, but that is sorta a Mario game so I guess it doesn't count. I get the feeling we'll get one or two X style IP's during the Wii U's lifespan (In terms of hardcore appeal), but weather Nintendo will back them like they do their pillar franchises is another matter altogether (And 1 I don't have too much faith in). Nothing to do but wait and see. At least I have my 3DS for Nintendo games/RPG's for now (EO4/SOUL HACKERS/FIXED DEVIL SURVIVOR NOW ATLUS!)
Click to expand...

yeah I have no doubt they'd market something like Luigi, because it is a identifiable Mario expansion game. It's just more whoring of the core characters again.

Neteio(sp) keeps trying to convince me to play Luigi's Mansion 2, but I can't bring myself to do it considering how awful Luigi's Mansion 1 is, but maybe one day when it's bargain bin ($5 or less) I'll bite.

Honestly if we can get at least 1 or 2 Xenoblade style games per year, that is genuinely new franchises completely unrelated to any of the old with big budgets for both development and marketing, I'll consider that an appropriate place to be for Nintendo and will praise their efforts. Small steps.
 
MvmntInGrn said:
I'm 23 and I have a major fear of becoming a person who abandons what they enjoy in order to "grow up":
grownups.png
Click to expand...

There's a lot of truth in this comic.

I just turned 40. I think I have come to see that Sol, Jupiter and weak nuclear forces care not what human beings think is kiddy.
 
While I love Nintendo. I don't enjoy the new games.

Mario Galaxy 2 being an exception. For the most part they just seem stale.

I miss cutting edge Nintendo. Game changer Nintendo.
 
Same reason people say things like, "I don't like anime."

It actually means, "I didn't like a couple things in this category, and I think some other things look stupid, so I'm going to broadly generalize everything in this category, put them all under the same umbrella, and say I don't like any of them."

JWong said:
Edit: Ugh, the smash argument again? It's not a fighting game. It's its own genre that I'd call Party Platformer.
Click to expand...

Party platformer? That is the stupidest fucking thing I've ever read.
 
Amir0x said:
I am not sure why you wouldn't. The only things that define FPS are if they are in first person and if you shoot things. But every angle of the word, that's what it is. There are FPS with all different types of approaches, and it'd be fair to call Metroid Prime both an action/adventure game AND a FPS, but it is definitely a FPS.

And unlike Mirror's Edge as in Anihawk's comment, shooting IS one of the primary focuses of the game, and in Mirror's Edge you can play through everything without even shooting a single bullet and everything is made to encourage precisely that. Even still, I'd say calling it a FPS is an appropriate qualifier, it's just other things as well.
Click to expand...

What about Portal? To me is a puzzle game, just like Braid. Both primary puzzle games that use first person shooter controls or platformer mechanincs to achieve something.
 
Opiate said:
If I were to give an explanation for why I don't personally like most of Nintendo's games, it's that I like games which simultaneously have low skill floors (i.e. how hard it is to get in to the games, which Nintendo does quite well) but also high skill ceilings (i.e. how rewarded one is for high skill levels, which I think Nintendo is almost deliberately poor at).
Click to expand...

This is an interesting topic. While some games certainly have very low ceilings (Kirby games for instance), some Nintendo games can get quite difficult indeed. The secret star levels in New Super Mario Bros Wii U, for instance, or the time trial runs. The secret Banana Temple levels in DKCR were cruel. The new Fire Emblem not only has Lunatic but Lunatic+ modes, which are ridiculously difficult. Punchout ramps up in difficulty quite a bit, requiring excellent pattern recognition and quick reflexes.

I will agree that generally Nintendo is bad at awarding content rewards for accomplishing difficult tasks. While I was doing the 100% thing in NSMB Wii U, for instance, my wife often asked me "why" I was doing it. "What do you even get for doing all this?" I replied: "My save file gets a start on it, but really it's just the satisfaction of knowing I did it." I feel like these games often have high ceilings for skilled players to play in, but they don't do much to entice you beyond the "Why Climb Mt. Everest?" question.

The other thing about challenge is something I'll go into more after this next quote...


tokkun said:
Mario Galaxy is one of the easiest games I have played in years. I think I fell asleep one time while playing and woke up with 99 lives. I kept wondering when the tutorial levels would be finished all the way up to the end of the game.

I still don't understand why more people didn't have the same complaint, because I don't consider myself to be unusually good at videogames and I like Mario platformers in general.
Click to expand...


In contrast, my wife will not play Mario games, 2D or 3D, anymore. I ask her about this often, and the main reason she says she doesn't play them anymore is because she finds them too difficult. Mind you, she has completed Fire Emblem on Lunatic at this point so she doesn't have trouble with game systems especially in a RPG or strategy sense. But action games that require skillful reflexes and moves? Those can give her trouble, and she doesn't want to put in the effort for no real content reward. She can certainly get good at them when she wants to -- I've never been able to beat her at Double Dash, which she played a ton of -- but nowadays she wants more content and doesn't want to have to develop the skills to play a harder game.

For this reason, she loves the Assassin's Creed series. Those games practically play themselves for you, and you can kill 30 guys by simply waiting for the button prompt and pressing X or what have you.

I suggested she try the Batman games because the combat is kinda similar but even those get into the realm of requiring too many reflexes and action-style fighting.
 
Amir0x said:
yeah I have no doubt they'd market something like Luigi, because it is a identifiable Mario expansion game. It's just more whoring of the core characters again.

Neteio(sp) keeps trying to convince me to play Luigi's Mansion 2, but I can't bring myself to do it considering how awful Luigi's Mansion 1 is, but maybe one day when it's bargain bin ($5 or less) I'll bite.

Honestly if we can get at least 1 or 2 Xenoblade style games per year, that is genuinely new franchises completely unrelated to any of the old with big budgets for both development and marketing, I'll consider that an appropriate place to be for Nintendo and will praise their efforts. Small steps.
Click to expand...
Yea, which is why I assumed it doesn't count lol.

Haven't played LM2 yet, the first was pretty fun, waaaay to short though.

Woah, 1 or 2 per year? Good fucking luck! You'll get 1 or 2 this whole gen, and you'll like it dammit!
 
GoofsterStud said:
While I love Nintendo. I don't enjoy the new games.

Maria Galaxy 2 being an exception. For the most part they just seem stale.

I miss cutting edge Nintendo. Game changer Nintendo.
Click to expand...

I could imagine that since a sizable portion of discourse against the company (and gaming in general) would come from teenagers, there is an ever increasing percentage of people who don't know what 'game changer' Nintendo is. People who have a hard time even remembering the Gamecube, and in a few years, the Wii.
 
Vampirolol said:
What about Portal? To me is a puzzle game, just like Braid. Both primary puzzle games that use first person shooter controls or platformer mechanincs to achieve something.
Click to expand...

Portal definitely isn't a FPS, you don't really shoot things in the sense that 'shooting' is utilized in the genre label in general. Same with Antichamber, both of these games are first person and have a 'tool' which can be interpreted as 'shooting', but what it really is is just the tool for solving all puzzles. I'd say Portal and Antichamber are example of games which actually aren't FPS, unlike Metroid Prime.

Diablos54 said:
Yea, which is why I assumed it doesn't count lol.

Haven't played LM2 yet, the first was pretty fun, waaaay to short though.
Click to expand...

Netieo (sp) told me that Luigi's Mansion 2 is more like a series of extended puzzles and bares little resemblance to the first game, but I just don't have the money to take the risk when the first was simply a glorified hide and seek game. I'll have to bargain bin that bitch if it works out, although I'm sure Nintendo will wait eighteen years to drop the price at all.

Diablos54 said:
Woah, 1 or 2 per year? Good fucking luck! You'll get 1 or 2 this whole gen, and you'll like it dammit!
Click to expand...

I'm as pessimistic as you are, but that is my bar for them to be above criticism in this category. They need to start expanding their portfolio in bold, eye catching ways and stop pussying out on utilizing your war chest. Jump into your bank, expand development teams and start working on titles that are completely unrelated to any of your core IPs. Be big, be bold, and if they like be innovative (as Nintendo generally doesn't have a problem when they want). But make sure you announce these games well in advance so you can build up hype (none of this Excite racing one month in advance BS) and make sure you allocate a sizable marketing budget for the game.

Kinect was an abomination of videogame technology, but Microsoft spent 500,000,000 forcing it to be a success. Nintendo needs to provide their games with the support that says 'this game may be the next big thing, if you give it a shot.'
 
Glass Rebel said:
Come on, Derrick, this has never stopped you. ;)
Click to expand...

True. I guess I'll do 1.

I don't feel like 3D zelda belongs in this current industry. We've reached a point in tech where a lot of devs in different genres have been able to do full open worlds that feel more alive than anything in Zelda and offer a lot of stuff to do, whether it's on purpose from the devs or using your own creativity. They do that while offering mostly voiced casts and with better stories/lore than anything Zelda has ever attempted. They do it while offering more involved combat systems than the basic horizontal/vertical sword slashing in Zelda (I admit I have no idea how much the motion stuff changed that though). They do it with better exploration aspects and sometimes with better gadgets too.

Really the only thing the series still offers in this day and age are the puzzles in dungeons, which I guess depends on how much you love puzzles. Personally I've only ever been thrown off by 1 and that was the infamous water temple in OOT, so I never put a lot of stock into those games' puzzles.
 
Love every Mario game (Sans 2) up to Super Mario World which is my personal favourite. I remember seeing Mario 64 and being really put off by it, I played some of it and didn't really care for it. I've not enjoyed a Mario game as much as SMW since.

Other Nintendo games I've never really cared for other than the odd Pokemon game.

Super Mario World....you beauty.
 
well, since you can find people who only like FPS, realistic sports and racing games and stuff like that, i can see why there's people who don't like nintendo games since they don't cover those genres.

but the problem is narrow tastes and not nintendo's games if that's the case.
 
Jamix012 said:
I really don't have that much invested in this, it's just a curiosity to me because it didn't really make sense. As if to somehow "renounce" any accusations of fanboyism I may get, I actually prefer the Vita's output thus far to that of the 3DS' (though the games on the horizon make it seem like that'll change.)
It's clear to me now at least that ceratin people (Opiate) may not like Nintendo games in general because they tend to appeal to a broader demographic, but as Opiate himself mentioned those who simply claim to not like Nintendo games in general seem to have a mental block. Like I completely understand your position but I doubt you would go out and say you "don't like Nintendo games."
Click to expand...

True, and definitely not trying to say fanboy or anything just more trying to say do not let other people bring you down.
And me, I would definitely never say I do not like "Nintendo games" and I am always waiting to be moved again.
I just feel that things are not as shiny in the mushroom kingdom as it were as many wish and would like it to be. But on the other hand there are many who never even try the games.
 
Good grief.

Because in the last ten years they've only made one game that I really enjoyed. Even back in their prime it was never the Nintendo games that I was drooling over for the NES and SNES. They'd do a good Mario and Zelda, and that's all I wanted out of them.
 
Kaijima said:
There are a number of great posts in this thread, but to add a thought on the OP:

"How can you not like Nintendo games?" is a not-uncommon sentiment in video games because Nintendo literally is video games to some people. This is more than just blind fanboyism; it's reasonable that Nintendo would represent gaming itself to some because Nintendo is a foundation of gaming post-84 western console game crash.

However, for all that, it's still perfectly reasonable that other people to have no general interest in Nintendo games. Gaming is bigger than Nintendo, and always has been - just as motion pictures are far bigger than say, Walt Disney, for all that Disney is a pillar of motion pictures.

I do think what gets under the skin of some Nintendo fans are overly silly dismissals of Nintendo games, that are structured along the same lines as saying "I hate Pixar and all their movies. I saw Toy Story and it was a dumb cartoon full of talking animals. That's for babies."

Nintendo does seem to be a pretty big target for that kind of thing due to the fact that they are historically placed on a pedestal as being important contributors to gaming as a medium and an industry. Normal people who simply happen to not care for Nintendo tend to get caught in the crossfire between outraged fans and those who actually do have this kind of juvenile chip on their shoulder about Nintendo. "That stupid Nintendo, why is everyone saying they're so great? I hate everything about them and must take them down."
Click to expand...

I like this post. Yes, sir, I do.
 
Derrick01 said:
True. I guess I'll do 1.

I don't feel like 3D zelda belongs in this current industry. We've reached a point in tech where a lot of devs in different genres have been able to do full open worlds that feel more alive than anything in Zelda and offer a lot of stuff to do, whether it's on purpose from the devs or using your own creativity. They do that while offering mostly voiced casts and with better stories/lore than anything Zelda has ever attempted. They do it while offering more involved combat systems than the basic horizontal/vertical sword slashing in Zelda (I admit I have no idea how much the motion stuff changed that though). They do it with better exploration aspects and sometimes with better gadgets too.

Really the only thing the series still offers in this day and age are the puzzles in dungeons, which I guess depends on how much you love puzzles. Personally I've only ever been thrown off by 1 and that was the infamous water temple in OOT, so I never put a lot of stock into those games' puzzles.
Click to expand...

Yo Derrick your FACE doesn't belong in the current industry >:(

I will say it really perplexes me that you're all down on Zelda. There is plenty of exploration in these games that can be plenty engaging, the lack of voice acting and engaging story is a real who-gives-a-shit (because almost all games have shit stories and I at least would like the opportunity to not also be assaulted by shit voice acting).

The key to Zelda games is dungeon design and puzzle design and boss design, and the level design in the top tier Zelda games remains some of the most clear masterpieces of game design ever put to programming code. It seems to me not liking Zelda titles would go against the philosophy I typically hear you preach about games, but maybe I'm misinterpreting your point.

Seriously Zelda games are amazing, although the two DS ones and Skyward Sword were extremely disappointing.
 
Amir0x said:
Netieo (sp) told me that Luigi's Mansion 2 is more like a series of extended puzzles and bares little resemblance to the first game, but I just don't have the money to take the risk when the first was simply a glorified hide and seek game. I'll have to bargain bin that bitch if it works out, although I'm sure Nintendo will wait eighteen years to drop the price at all.
Click to expand...

i don't think that's wholly accurate. it's more like if someone took the first luigi's mansion and split it up into levels. instead of playing one mansion continuously like the first game, you're constantly completing objects and going back to the level select screen. they try to make this seem like a good thing by including high scores and medals to collect, but i'm not sold yet. paper mario for the 3ds handled this concept a lot better.
 
Derrick01 said:
True. I guess I'll do 1.

I don't feel like 3D zelda belongs in this current industry. We've reached a point in tech where a lot of devs in different genres have been able to do full open worlds that feel more alive than anything in Zelda and offer a lot of stuff to do, whether it's on purpose from the devs or using your own creativity. They do that while offering mostly voiced casts and with better stories/lore than anything Zelda has ever attempted. They do it while offering more involved combat systems than the basic horizontal/vertical sword slashing in Zelda (I admit I have no idea how much the motion stuff changed that though). They do it with better exploration aspects and sometimes with better gadgets too.

Really the only thing the series still offers in this day and age are the puzzles in dungeons, which I guess depends on how much you love puzzles. Personally I've only ever been thrown off by 1 and that was the infamous water temple in OOT, so I never put a lot of stock into those games' puzzles.
Click to expand...
You basically said because there are other games in other genres that have fields and sword we don't need Zelda games. The fact you can't give one example of a game that is like Zelda goes to show there is a still a gap that it fulfils. I mean voice casts and deep combat are things the Zelda games never strived to achieved because it's not part of their design. Even Skyward Swords focus on the sword presented combat as a puzzle rather than a brawl.
 
Amir0x said:
Seriously Zelda games are amazing, although the two DS ones and Skyward Sword were extremely disappointing.
Click to expand...

spirit tracks would have been better as a collection of dungeons. seriously, all of those were a lot of fun. the game was just bogged down by terrible design in its overworld.

skyward sword was made like super mario galaxy, so of course it kinda blew in some respects. the pacing was mostly off, but the worst aspect was how safe it played with the dungeon design. it bears little resemblance to the creativity in the ds games, where at least they were messing around with touch controls in puzzles. like super mario galaxy, it was like they were too afraid to design something too crazy, because they were worried people would struggle understanding the controls at first. i do appreciate that the majority of skyward sword is very dungeonlike (that's all the stuff on the ground is at its core), but they don't do much interesting with it. that final dungeon was pretty special though, especially as a longtime zelda fan (although it still had nothing to do with the nifty motion controls they designed the game around).
 
Derrick01 said:
True. I guess I'll do 1.

I don't feel like 3D zelda belongs in this current industry. We've reached a point in tech where a lot of devs in different genres have been able to do full open worlds that feel more alive than anything in Zelda and offer a lot of stuff to do, whether it's on purpose from the devs or using your own creativity. They do that while offering mostly voiced casts and with better stories/lore than anything Zelda has ever attempted. They do it while offering more involved combat systems than the basic horizontal/vertical sword slashing in Zelda (I admit I have no idea how much the motion stuff changed that though). They do it with better exploration aspects and sometimes with better gadgets too.

Really the only thing the series still offers in this day and age are the puzzles in dungeons, which I guess depends on how much you love puzzles. Personally I've only ever been thrown off by 1 and that was the infamous water temple in OOT, so I never put a lot of stock into those games' puzzles.
Click to expand...
Yet still since oot was introduced there have been no game to match the Zelda design at all. Resident evils...FPS...Uncharteds...they all been met with equals. Zelda? Not yet.
 
Amir0x said:
Netieo (sp) told me that Luigi's Mansion 2 is more like a series of extended puzzles and bares little resemblance to the first game, but I just don't have the money to take the risk when the first was simply a glorified hide and seek game. I'll have to bargain bin that bitch if it works out, although I'm sure Nintendo will wait eighteen years to drop the price at all.
Click to expand...

This is one of the biggest deterrents for me purchasing 1st party Nintendo titles. I was shocked when I went to purchase Twilight Pricess, years after it was released and found that it was still full retail price. As a result of the MSRP, Gamestop only offered a used copy for 5 dollars less >.>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

People Can Fly-Sony Partnership game?
33
229
Mr. PlayStation replied
I think Nintendo games feels like you are on some drugs
36
584
Kuranghi replied
Were Nintendo fans actually sincere when they said Nintendo only needed Nintendo games?
37
38
ReBurn replied
Remedy CEO Says AI Can't Replicate Games Like Alan Wake 2, Launch Close To GTA 6 Will Help, Not Hurt Other Games
Opinion Game Dev 
17
119
ahtlas7 replied
How Nintendo EAD stole Metroid for the GameCube (Or how Metroid Prime was created)
Opinion Analysis Retro 
16
190
ReyBrujo replied
Top Bottom